Exide Industries Ltd. v. Union of India

292 ITR 470High Court2007#234 most cited

What is Exide Industries Ltd. v. Union of India authority for?

Section 43B(f) of the Income-tax Act is unconstitutional and arbitrary. Leave encashment is a trading liability and not subject to the restrictions of Section 43B(f), thus allowable as a business deduction under Section 37(1).

320

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Exide Industries Ltd. v. Union of India · Section 43B(f) struck down · leave encashment deduction · trading liability · Section 37(1) business expenditure · unconstitutional 43B(f) · penalty for claiming leave encashment · Section 43B · provision for leave encashment · arbitrariness of 43B(f)

Also reported as

164 Taxmann 9

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 14ASection 263Section 43B(f)Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12A

Issues it is cited on

section 43b(f)section 32(1)(iia)additional depreciationsection 43bsection 43penalty under section 271(1)(c)revenue expenditurefurnishing inaccurate particularscapital expendituresection 32penalty u/s 271(1)(c)section 115jb

Judgments citing Exide Industries Ltd. v. Union of India

ASST CIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3882/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…2017 We have perused the submission advanced by both sides in light of records placed before u/s. 13.2. It is noted that assesse raised this claim based on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Exide Industries Ltd. vs. UOI reported in (2007) 292 ITR 470. The revenue challenged the said decision before Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein the constitutional validity of Section 43B(f) was upheld in [2020] 425 ITR 1. 13.3. In any event, it is noted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the deduction in respect of such liability is allowable only on actual payment basis. Accordingly, the provision s…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3680/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…2017 We have perused the submission advanced by both sides in light of records placed before u/s. 13.2. It is noted that assesse raised this claim based on the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Exide Industries Ltd. vs. UOI reported in (2007) 292 ITR 470. The revenue challenged the said decision before Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein the constitutional validity of Section 43B(f) was upheld in [2020] 425 ITR 1. 13.3. In any event, it is noted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the deduction in respect of such liability is allowable only on actual payment basis. Accordingly, the provision s…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 545/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…lowance of this amount. While doing so, he further held that the provisions of section 43B are not applicable in this case. 125. In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of CIT vs. Hindustan latex Ltd. (209 Taxman 42) & Exide Industries Ltd. vs. UOI (292 ITR 470) held that the payment of premium towards leave encashment policy was business expenditure done purely and exclusively for business purpose and was allowable as deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act. 126. Aggrieved with such findings of the Ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 127. The Ld. Special Counsel for the Revenue submitted…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 544/PUN/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…lowance of this amount. While doing so, he further held that the provisions of section 43B are not applicable in this case. 125. In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of CIT vs. Hindustan latex Ltd. (209 Taxman 42) & Exide Industries Ltd. vs. UOI (292 ITR 470) held that the payment of premium towards leave encashment policy was business expenditure done purely and exclusively for business purpose and was allowable as deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act. 126. Aggrieved with such findings of the Ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 127. The Ld. Special Counsel for the Revenue submitted…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 543/PUN/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…lowance of this amount. While doing so, he further held that the provisions of section 43B are not applicable in this case. 125. In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of CIT vs. Hindustan latex Ltd. (209 Taxman 42) & Exide Industries Ltd. vs. UOI (292 ITR 470) held that the payment of premium towards leave encashment policy was business expenditure done purely and exclusively for business purpose and was allowable as deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act. 126. Aggrieved with such findings of the Ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 127. The Ld. Special Counsel for the Revenue submitted…

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1155/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…lowance of this amount. While doing so, he further held that the provisions of section 43B are not applicable in this case. 125. In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of CIT vs. Hindustan latex Ltd. (209 Taxman 42) & Exide Industries Ltd. vs. UOI (292 ITR 470) held that the payment of premium towards leave encashment policy was business expenditure done purely and exclusively for business purpose and was allowable as deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act. 126. Aggrieved with such findings of the Ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 127. The Ld. Special Counsel for the Revenue submitted…

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1154/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…lowance of this amount. While doing so, he further held that the provisions of section 43B are not applicable in this case. 125. In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of CIT vs. Hindustan latex Ltd. (209 Taxman 42) & Exide Industries Ltd. vs. UOI (292 ITR 470) held that the payment of premium towards leave encashment policy was business expenditure done purely and exclusively for business purpose and was allowable as deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act. 126. Aggrieved with such findings of the Ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 127. The Ld. Special Counsel for the Revenue submitted…

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1153/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…lowance of this amount. While doing so, he further held that the provisions of section 43B are not applicable in this case. 125. In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the decision of CIT vs. Hindustan latex Ltd. (209 Taxman 42) & Exide Industries Ltd. vs. UOI (292 ITR 470) held that the payment of premium towards leave encashment policy was business expenditure done purely and exclusively for business purpose and was allowable as deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act. 126. Aggrieved with such findings of the Ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 127. The Ld. Special Counsel for the Revenue submitted…

NARAYANA HRUDAYALAYA LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 246/BANG/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Monish Sowkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Thamba Mahendra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2012-13 Narayana Hrudayalaya Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner No.258/A, Bommasandra of Income Tax, Industrial Area, Circle 2[3][1], Bengaluru – 560 009. Bengaluru. PAN: AABCN 1685J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Monish Sowkar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Thamba Mahendra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 21.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, Vice President 1. This appeal…

OGD SERVICES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1407/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan,(Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 43BSection 44A

…and the appeal filed by the company was dismissed. The AO subsequently passed penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act observing that the assessee had relied on the decision of the hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. vs. UOI (2007) 292 ITR 470 and claiming that the provisions of section 43B(f) of the Act stood struck offin view of the decision of thehon Apex Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers vs CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428.He opined that the hon'ble Apex Court had admitted SLP filed by the Revenue against the above decision of the hon'ble Calcutta High Court. In the interim order pass…

DHANUKA AGRITECH LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed as indicated above

ITA 1794/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Nirbhay Mehta, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 43B

…nces of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) erred in upholding the levy of penalty u/s 270A of 2 ITA No.-1794/Del/2023 DhanukaAgritech Ltd. the Act without considering the fact that while imposing stay on the decision of Exide Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India [2007] 292 ITR 470 (High Court of Calcutta), Hon'ble Supreme Court simultaneously entitled the assessce to make claim of leave encashment expenditure in its returns. 7.0Without prejudice to the above, that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) erred in upholding the levy of penalty equal to two hundred percent of the amount of tax payab…

UNIVERSAL CABLES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 53/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 119(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'डी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री दुव्वुरु आरएल रेड्डी, उपाध्यक्ष (कोलकाता क्षेत्र) एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT (KZ) & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 53/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Universal Cables Limited A.C.I.T., Circle-6(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAACU3547P Appearances: Assessee represented by : Akkal Dudhewala, FCA. Department represented by : Sailen Samadder, Sr. D.R. Date of concluding the hearing : 09-Apr-2025 Date of p…

INTERVALVE POONAWALLA PVT. LTD. ,PUNE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

ITA 637/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15 Intervalve Poonawalla Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle 1(1), Fin Div. 16/B-1, Sarosh Bhavan, Pune Vs. 2Nd Floor, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Opp. Niv, Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaaci3917P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak & Vishnu Bhutada Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 14-05-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04-06-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S Pathak &For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 4Section 43B

…e by the assessee as an employer in lieu of any salary at the credit of its employee shall be allowed as a deduction only on actual payment basis. He submitted that the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India (2007) 292 ITR 470 (Cal) has struck down the provisions of section 43B(f) of the Act as being arbitrary and ultra vires. He submitted that in light of the above decision the assessee has made a claim. The Hon'ble Supreme Court only in the year 2020 has reversed the decision. Further, in assessment year 2010-11, although the Tribunal confirmed the addition made by t…

VASAI VIKAS SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED,VASAI, THANE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER CIRCLE-3, THANE, QURESHI MANSION, GOKHALE ROAD, THANE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed

ITA 1741/MUM/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vasai Vikas Sahakari Bank Limited Income Tax Officer Circle-3 Opp New English School, Vasai, Qureshi Mansion, Gokhale Mumbai-401201 Vs. Road, Mumbai- 400602 Pan No. Aaaav 0519 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Prateek JainFor Respondent: Smt. Kavita P. Kaushik, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 43Section 43B

…particulars in return of income. In response, the assessee submitted that said claim for provision for leave encashment was made in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries Limited V/s. Union Of India reported in 292 ITR 470, wherein it is held that leave encashment was not a statutory liability, but it was a trading liability not to be affected by the provision of section 43(B)(f) of the Act and section 43B(f) of the Act was struck down being arbitrary. The Ld. assessing officer rejected the contention of the assessee and held the assessee in default filing inaccura…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI vs. T.V. TODAY NETWORK LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 1820/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarita Nos. 1819 & 1820/Del/2024 (Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Acit Vs. T.V. Today Network Ltd. Room No.192A, First Floor F-26, First Floor, Cr Building, Ip Estate, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 002 New Delhi – 110 001 Pan : Aabct 0424 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Madhur Aggarwal, Adv. Respondent By Shri Amit Katock, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing 01.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.12.2024 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar, Jm:

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43BSection 8D

…ification of the claim of the assessee of Leave encashment amounting to Rs.77,71,211/-. As per ratio of judgment in the case of Exide -7- ITA Nos.1819 & 1820/Del/2024 ACIT vs. T.V. Today Network Ltd A.Y. 2016-17 & 2017-18 Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India 292 ITR 470, the directions for verification of the claim of assessee are deserves to be upheld. 16. Learned CIT(A) deleted the addition on account of Disallowance of 50% of software expenses amounting to Rs.16,84,803/-. Since learned AO had not given any specific reason and exact amount of the expenditure to treat such expenditure as capital in nature. Rel…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI vs. T.V. TODAY NETWORK LIMITED, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal in ITA No

ITA 1819/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarita Nos. 1819 & 1820/Del/2024 (Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Acit Vs. T.V. Today Network Ltd. Room No.192A, First Floor F-26, First Floor, Cr Building, Ip Estate, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 002 New Delhi – 110 001 Pan : Aabct 0424 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Madhur Aggarwal, Adv. Respondent By Shri Amit Katock, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing 01.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.12.2024 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar, Jm:

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43BSection 8D

…ification of the claim of the assessee of Leave encashment amounting to Rs.77,71,211/-. As per ratio of judgment in the case of Exide -7- ITA Nos.1819 & 1820/Del/2024 ACIT vs. T.V. Today Network Ltd A.Y. 2016-17 & 2017-18 Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India 292 ITR 470, the directions for verification of the claim of assessee are deserves to be upheld. 16. Learned CIT(A) deleted the addition on account of Disallowance of 50% of software expenses amounting to Rs.16,84,803/-. Since learned AO had not given any specific reason and exact amount of the expenditure to treat such expenditure as capital in nature. Rel…

JCIT, (OSD), CIR-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BATES INDIA PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed

ITA 1134/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2011-2012

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhrijcit (Osd), Circle-8(1), V/S. M/S Bates India (P). Ltd. Kolkata बनाम 2Nd Floor, Saberwal House, Aayakar Bhawan, 5Th Floor, 55B, Mirza Ghalib Street, P-7, Chowringhee Sq., Kokata-700016 Kolkata-700069 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcc3474A Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Ajit ShahFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 115JSection 250Section 43B

…e addition of Rs. 41,44,047/- u/s 43B on the issue of disallowance for provision for leave encashment u/s 115JB relying upon the judgment of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Exide Industries vs. UOI P a g e | 2 A.Y. 2011-12 M/s. Bates India Pvt. Ltd. 292 ITR 470 (SC) when it is noticed that for Α.Υ. 2007-08, the Hon'ble ITAT has set aside the case of the assessee as the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Exide Industries vs- UOI (referred above) has been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on same issue.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that disallowance u/s 43B was made by the…

M/S.STATE BANK OF INDIA(SUCCESSOR TO STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE),TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

ITA 252/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Sri Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 36(1)(vili)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH : COCHIN BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.Nos.251 & 252/Coch./2017 Assessment Years 2002-2003 & 2010-2011 M/s. State Bank of The ACIT, Circle-1(1), Travancore, Head Office (Tax Aayakar Bhavan, Kowdiar Cell), 2nd Floor, Poojappura, vs. PO, TRIVANDRUM TRIVANDRUM – 695 012. PIN – 695 003. PAN AAGCS9120G. KERALA. KERALA. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Sri Ninad Patade, CA For Revenue : Sri Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 20.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 25.09.2024 ORDER PER BENCH : Th…

M/S.STATE BANK OF INDIA(SUCCESSOR TO STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE),TRIVANDRUM vs. THE ACIT, TRIVANDRUM

ITA 251/COCH/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Sri Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 36(1)(vili)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH : COCHIN BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.Nos.251 & 252/Coch./2017 Assessment Years 2002-2003 & 2010-2011 M/s. State Bank of The ACIT, Circle-1(1), Travancore, Head Office (Tax Aayakar Bhavan, Kowdiar Cell), 2nd Floor, Poojappura, vs. PO, TRIVANDRUM TRIVANDRUM – 695 012. PIN – 695 003. PAN AAGCS9120G. KERALA. KERALA. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Sri Ninad Patade, CA For Revenue : Sri Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 20.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 25.09.2024 ORDER PER BENCH : Th…

SUNDARAM FASTENERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

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

ITA 3236/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3236/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. M/S.Sundram Fasteners Ltd., The Dcit, 98-A, 7Th Floor, Corporate Circle-6(2), Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Chennai. Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. [Pan: Aaacs 8779 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vikaram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं एवं एवं एवं "ी अिमताभ शु"ा, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3236/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 v. M/s.Sundram Fasteners Ltd., The DCIT, 98-A, 7th Floor, Corporate Circle-6(2), Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Chennai. Mylapore, Chennai-600 004. [PAN: AAACS 8779 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /R…

Showing 1–20 of 320 · Page 1 of 16

...