What is Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

An employer's delayed remittance of employees' contributions to provident fund (PF) or Employees' State Insurance (ESI) is deductible if the payment is made before the due date for filing the income tax return under section 139(1), applying the provisions of section 43B and notwithstanding section 36(1)(va).

How many judgments cite Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT?

519 judgments on BharatTax cite Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (366 ITR 408), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 36(1)(va), Section 234B, Section 234C, Section 143(1), Section 143(1)(a), Section 43B.

Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (366 ITR 408)

Jagadish Reddy, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 278/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh T.R., A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Srinivas Rao Bandaru, D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…he material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution to ESI before the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of EssaeTeraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujar…

Jagadish Reddy, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 277/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh T.R., A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Srinivas Rao Bandaru, D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…he material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution to ESI before the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of EssaeTeraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujar…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Altisource Business Solutions India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed as indicated hereinabove and appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 164/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 162/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Altisource Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Pritech Park, 3Rd & 5Th Floors Of Wing A & The Deputy 4Th Floor Of Wing B, Commissioner Of Block No. 12, Pritech Park, Income Tax, Survey No. 51-64/4, Circle – 1 (1)(2), Bellandur Village, Bangalore. Vs. Sarjapur Marathahalli Outer Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 103. Pan: Aaaco9467A Appellant Respondent & It(Tp)A No. 164/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2012-13 (By Revenue) : Shri K.R. Vasudevan, Assessee By Advocate : Smt. Susan Dolores George Revenue By Cit (Osd) Date Of Hearing : 30-05-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-06-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Against Order Dated 31.08.2017 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-1, Bangalore For A.Y. 2012-13 On Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 92C(3)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 162/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/s. Altisource Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Pritech Park, 3rd and 5th Floors of wing A & The Deputy 4th Floor of Wing B, Commissioner of Block No. 12, Pritech Park, Income Tax, Survey No. 51-64/4, Circle – 1 (1)(2), Bellandur Village, Bangalore. Vs. Sarjapur Marathahalli Outer Ring Road, Bangalore – 560 103. PAN: AAACO9467A APPELLANT RESPONDENT & IT(TP)A No. 164/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2012-13 (By Revenue) : Shri…

M/S Total Environment Building Systems Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and the assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 46/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT DR

Section 250Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 45 & 46/Bang/2017 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s. Total Environment Building Systems Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner of ‘Imagine’, No. 78, Income Tax, ITPL Main Road, Circle – 7 (1)(1), EPIP Zone, Whitefield, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 066. PAN: AABCT9452F APPELLANT RESPONDENT & Assessment Year : 2010-11 (By Revenue) : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee by Advocate Revenue by : Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 29-06-2022 Date of Pron…

Total Environment Building Systems Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and the assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 45/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT DR

Section 250Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 45 & 46/Bang/2017 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s. Total Environment Building Systems Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner of ‘Imagine’, No. 78, Income Tax, ITPL Main Road, Circle – 7 (1)(1), EPIP Zone, Whitefield, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 066. PAN: AABCT9452F APPELLANT RESPONDENT & Assessment Year : 2010-11 (By Revenue) : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee by Advocate Revenue by : Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 29-06-2022 Date of Pron…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Total Environment Building Systems Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed and the assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 40/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT DR

Section 250Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 45 & 46/Bang/2017 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 M/s. Total Environment Building Systems Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner of ‘Imagine’, No. 78, Income Tax, ITPL Main Road, Circle – 7 (1)(1), EPIP Zone, Whitefield, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 066. PAN: AABCT9452F APPELLANT RESPONDENT & Assessment Year : 2010-11 (By Revenue) : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Assessee by Advocate Revenue by : Shri Vilas V Shinde, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 29-06-2022 Date of Pron…

Mohd Haseeb, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer, Range 6(2), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 76/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Jun 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jainassessment Year: 2018-19 Mohd. Haseeb V. The Ito 551 Jha, Ram Nagar Range 6(2) Kanpur Road, Alambagh Lucknow Lucknow Tan/Pan:Abcph6980P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Samrat Chandra, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 16 06 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 27 06 2022 O R D E R This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, New Delhi, Dated 29.12.2021, For Assessment Year 2018-19, Raising The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. Because Without Considering The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & In Facts In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.23,88,734/- Under Section 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)X) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Being Delay In Deposition Of Employees Share Of Provident Fund. 2. That In Any Case & In Any View Of The Matter, Impugned Addition/Allowance Assessment Order Are Bad In Law, Illegal, Unjustified, Contrary To Facts & Law & Based Upon Recording Of Incorrect Facts & Finding, Without Giving Adequate Opportunity Of Hearing, In Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice & The Same Deserves To Be Quashed.

For Appellant: Shri Samrat Chandra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

Section 154Section 36(1)(va)

…he view taken in the earlier judgments and follow the view taken by Gujrat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation (supra) and this occasion came in Essae Teraoka P. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (2014) 366 ITR 408. Dispute relates to A.Y. 2008-09. Assessee filed Return on 26.09.2008. Return was processed under Section 143(1) and thereafter on scrutiny, notice under Section 143(2) was issued. Assessing Officer completed assessment by order dated 24.12.2010 under Section 143(3) disallowing Rs.12,51,737/- under Section 36(1)(va) and also disallowing Rs.1,04,6…

Ryders Equestrian Products Private Limited, Kanpur vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangaluru, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 127/LKW/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Jun 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jainassessment Year: 2019-20 Ryders Equestrain Products V. The Dy. Cit Pvt. Ltd. Circle 2(1)(I) 50-A, 150, Feet Road Jajmau Lucknow Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aaecr3352B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Swaran Singh, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 15 06 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 27 06 2022 O R D E R This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, New Delhi, Dated 29.9.2021, For Assessment Year 2019-20, Raising The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Swaran Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…he view taken in the earlier judgments and follow the view taken by Gujrat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation (supra) and this occasion came in Essae Teraoka P. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (2014) 366 ITR 408. Dispute relates to A.Y. 2008-09. Assessee filed Return on 26.09.2008. Return was processed under Section 143(1) and thereafter on scrutiny, notice under Section 143(2) was issued. Assessing Officer completed assessment by order dated 24.12.2010 under Section 143(3) disallowing Rs.12,51,737/- under Section 36(1)(va) and also disallowing Rs.1,04,6…

Magic Auto Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Central Circle 13, Delhi

ITA 27/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 27/Del/2022 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Magic Auto Pvt. Ltd., Vs Adit, 7/56, Desh Bandhu Gupta Cpc, Road, Karol Bagh, Central Delhi, Delhi-110005 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm4873C Assessee By : Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.06.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice President Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 27/Del/2022 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Magic Auto Pvt. Ltd., Vs ADIT, 7/56, Desh Bandhu Gupta CPC, Road, Karol Bagh, Central Delhi, Delhi-110005 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACM4873C Assessee by : Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 12.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 27.06.2022 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-26, New Delh…

DCIT 13(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Sodexo Technical Services India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 508/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…e material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution to ESI before the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujar…

M/S. Ujjain Waste Management Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. WD 15 (3) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2083/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…he material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution to ESI before the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of EssaeTeraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujar…

G R Chandrashekar Naidu, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 249/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Ms.Sumangala Ranga, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…duction of the employees’ contribution of PF and ESI having regard to the provision to section 43B of the Act. In this context, the assessee relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT, reported in 366 ITR 408. The CIT(A) after noticing the difference between the employer’s contribution and employees’ contribution to PF and ESI held that only employer’s contribution to the PF and ESI is entitled to deduction u/s 43B of the I.T.Act, if the payments are made prior to the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. Further, by placing reli…

G R Chandrashekar Naidu, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 248/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Ms.Sumangala Ranga, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Besaganni, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…duction of the employees’ contribution of PF and ESI having regard to the provision to section 43B of the Act. In this context, the assessee relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT, reported in 366 ITR 408. The CIT(A) after noticing the difference between the employer’s contribution and employees’ contribution to PF and ESI held that only employer’s contribution to the PF and ESI is entitled to deduction u/s 43B of the I.T.Act, if the payments are made prior to the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. Further, by placing reli…

Hodala Ganapiah Chandrashekar, Tumkur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & Tps, Tumkur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 239/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep C., A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…he material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution to ESI before the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of EssaeTeraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujar…

Thiruvalaya Venugopal, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 235/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.Mrinalini, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sr.Narayana K.R., Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e erred in not following the decisions of this Hon’ble Tribunal in ITA No.1587/B/2018 dated 13.12.2018 and the jurisdictional decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka rendered in the case of Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax [366 ITR 408 (Kar.)] 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is opposed to law and facts of the case and the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not sustainable. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate the written submissions submitted in 2 Sri.Thiruvalaya Venugopal. accordance with law. 4.…

United Coffee House, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-52(4), Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 792/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi08 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. United Coffee House, Vs. Income Tax Officer, E-15, Connaught Place, Ward-52(4), Delhi Delhi Pan :Aaafu1260G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…view taken in the earlier judgments and follow the view taken by Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (supra) and this occasion came in Essae Teraoka P. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income- Tax, (2014) 366 ITR 408. Dispute relates to A.Y. 200809. 9 AY: 2019-20 Assessee filed Return on 26.09.2008. Return was processed under Section 143(1) and thereafter on scrutiny, notice under Section 143(2) was issued. Assessing Officer completed assessment by order dated 24.12.2010 under Section 143(3) disallowing Rs. 12,51,737/under Section 36(1)(va) and also disallow…

M/S. Avadh Hospital and Heart Centre, Lucknow vs. DCIT-6, Lucknow-New, Lucknow

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 105/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri A. P. Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Sachan, D.R

Section 36(1)(v)

…he view taken in the earlier judgments and follow the view taken by Gujrat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation (supra) and this occasion came in Essae Teraoka P. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (2014) 366 ITR 408. Dispute relates to A.Y. 2008-09. Assessee filed Return on 26.09.2008. Return was processed under Section 143(1) and thereafter on scrutiny, notice under Page 8 of 17 Section 143(2) was issued. Assessing Officer completed assessment by order dated 24.12.2010 under Section 143(3) disallowing Rs.12,51,737/- under Section 36(1)(va) and also disall…

M/S Avadh Hospital and Heart Centre, Lucknow vs. DCIT-6, Lucknow-New

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 104/LKW/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Jun 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri A. P. Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Sachan, D.R

Section 36(1)(v)

…he view taken in the earlier judgments and follow the view taken by Gujrat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation (supra) and this occasion came in Essae Teraoka P. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (2014) 366 ITR 408. Dispute relates to A.Y. 2008-09. Assessee filed Return on 26.09.2008. Return was processed under Section 143(1) and thereafter on scrutiny, notice under Page 8 of 17 Section 143(2) was issued. Assessing Officer completed assessment by order dated 24.12.2010 under Section 143(3) disallowing Rs.12,51,737/- under Section 36(1)(va) and also disall…

M/S Urban Coop Bank Ltd, Bareilly vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Bareilly New

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 133/LKW/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Jun 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri A.D Jain & Shri T.S. Kapoor

Section 139(1)Section 36Section 43B

…the view taken in the earlier judgments and follow the view taken by Gujrat High Court in Commissioner of IncomeTax Vs Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation (supra) and this occasion came in Essae Teraoka P. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of IncomeTax, (2014) 366 ITR 408. Dispute relates to A.Y. 200809. Assessee filed Return on 26.09.2008. Return was processed under Section 143(1) and thereafter on scrutiny, notice under Section 143(2) was issued. Assessing Officer completed assessment by order dated 24.12.2010 under Section 143(3) disallowing Rs. 12,51,737/ under Section 36(1)(va) and also disallowing Rs. 1,04,6…

Rashi Eco Tourism Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 50/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.S. Nethrapal, Addl. DIT

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…by the CIT(Appeals) on merits stating that this is not issue for consideration in an appeal filed against an order u/s.154. The ld AR’s contention is that the Jurisdictional decision of the High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) in which the issue is held in favour of the assessee is a record available and the order passed u/s.154 by the AO has not considered this material on record. Considering this argument and that the assessee has a favourable case on merits basis the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court we are proceeding to adjudicate the matter on me…

Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

What is Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

Jagadish Reddy, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

Jagadish Reddy, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Altisource Business Solutions India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

M/S Total Environment Building Systems Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

Total Environment Building Systems Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Total Environment Building Systems Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

Mohd Haseeb, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer, Range 6(2), Lucknow

Ryders Equestrian Products Private Limited, Kanpur vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangaluru, Kanpur

Magic Auto Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Central Circle 13, Delhi

DCIT 13(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Sodexo Technical Services India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

M/S. Ujjain Waste Management Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. WD 15 (3) (1), Mumbai

G R Chandrashekar Naidu, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

G R Chandrashekar Naidu, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

Hodala Ganapiah Chandrashekar, Tumkur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & Tps, Tumkur

Thiruvalaya Venugopal, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

United Coffee House, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-52(4), Delhi

M/S. Avadh Hospital and Heart Centre, Lucknow vs. DCIT-6, Lucknow-New, Lucknow

M/S Avadh Hospital and Heart Centre, Lucknow vs. DCIT-6, Lucknow-New

M/S Urban Coop Bank Ltd, Bareilly vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Bareilly New

Rashi Eco Tourism Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore