Kalpesh Synthetics (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT

137 Taxmann.com 475Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2022#470 most cited

What is Kalpesh Synthetics (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

A deduction claimed under Section 36(1)(va) for employee contributions remitted after the statutory due date but before the return filing due date cannot be disallowed during intimation processing under Section 143(1) if the issue is debatable. Such a disallowance cannot be made automatically based solely on auditor's mention of actual vs. due dates in the tax audit report.

198

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Kalpesh Synthetics (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT · Section 143(1) · Section 36(1)(va) · employee contribution disallowance · processing of return · debatable issue · intimation · tax audit report · Section 43B

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 154Section 40A(7)

Issues it is cited on

section 143(1)(a)(iii)section 143(1)(a)(i)section 44ab(a)processing under section 143(1)section 143(1)(a)(iv)section 40a(9)section 36(l)(va)section 40a(7)section 40(b)section 10aasection 36(l)section 2(24)(x)

Judgments citing Kalpesh Synthetics (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT

Shri Rohit Panchal, Indore vs. The DCIT-CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 203/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) M/S. Nimar Motors P. Ltd. Dcit, Cpc, Jetapur Sanawad Road Bangalore Vs. Khargone (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaccn 9368 D Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Smt. Chhaya Balwani Dcit, Cpc, Green Height, Bangalore Vs. 27, Gulmohar Colony Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aotpb 5766 P Assessee By Shri Anil Khabya, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Shri Rohit Panchal Dcit, Cpc, 47, Roop Ram Nagar, Bangalore Vs. Manik Bagh, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Amvpp 7291 D Assessee By Shri Hiresh Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) M/s. Nimar Motors P. Ltd. DCIT, CPC, Jetapur Sanawad Road Bangalore Vs. Khargone (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AACCN 9368 D Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Smt. Chhaya Balwani DCIT, CPC, Green Height, Bangalore Vs. 27, Gulmohar Colony Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AOTPB 5766 P Assessee by Shri Anil Khabya, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish…

Nimar Motors P Ltd, Khargone vs. DCIT/CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 118/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) M/S. Nimar Motors P. Ltd. Dcit, Cpc, Jetapur Sanawad Road Bangalore Vs. Khargone (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaccn 9368 D Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Smt. Chhaya Balwani Dcit, Cpc, Green Height, Bangalore Vs. 27, Gulmohar Colony Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aotpb 5766 P Assessee By Shri Anil Khabya, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Shri Rohit Panchal Dcit, Cpc, 47, Roop Ram Nagar, Bangalore Vs. Manik Bagh, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Amvpp 7291 D Assessee By Shri Hiresh Jain, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) M/s. Nimar Motors P. Ltd. DCIT, CPC, Jetapur Sanawad Road Bangalore Vs. Khargone (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AACCN 9368 D Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Smt. Chhaya Balwani DCIT, CPC, Green Height, Bangalore Vs. 27, Gulmohar Colony Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AOTPB 5766 P Assessee by Shri Anil Khabya, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish…

Lioyd Healthcare Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (CPC) Bangalore, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2342/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri S Rifaur Rahman () Lloyd Healthcare Pvt Ltd Vs Dcit (Cpc), Bangalore Unit No.3A, Wing B, 2Nd Floor Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Times Square, Marol 400 020 Andheri Kurla Road Andheri East, Mumbai-400 059 Pan : Aaccl1129L Appellant Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234ASection 36Section 36(1)(va)

…1 ITA 2342/Mum/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Lloyd Healthcare Pvt Ltd vs DCIT (CPC), Bangalore Unit No.3A, Wing B, 2nd Floor Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Times Square, Marol 400 020 Andheri Kurla Road Andheri East, Mumbai-400 059 PAN : AACCL1129L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shri Bhupendra Shah Department represented by Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, (Sr. AR) Date of hearing 09/01/2023 Date of pronouncement 23/02/2023 ORDER PER: KULDIP SINGH (JM): The Appellant, Lloyd Healthcare Pvt…

Kwality Motel Shiraz, Bhopal vs. Asst Director of Income Tax CPC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 187/IND/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Feb 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEBER, SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTNT MEMBER Kwality Motel Shiraz 1, Shivaji Nagar, Bhopal-462021

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Fadnis, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…“due dates” of I.T.A No. 187/Ind/2021 A.Y. 2019-2020 Page No 4 Kwality Motel Shiraz vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax remittance. Accordingly, in view of the Mumbai ITAT decisions in the case of PR Packaging in ITA number 2376/Mum/2022 and Kalpesh Synthetics 137 Taxmann.com 475 (Mumbai), this claim of deduction u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act cannot be disallowed u/s 143(1) of the Act (more specifically under sub-clause (d) to 143(1) of the Act). Secondly, the counsel argued that the issue at the time when the disallowance was made, issue was debatable and accordingly could not be the subject matter of disallowance und…

Prashanti Engineering Works P Ltd, Pithampur vs. The Asst.DCIT, CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 171/IND/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Feb 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Return Under Section 139(1).

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goyal &For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…I.T.A No. 171/Ind/2021 A.Y. 2019-2020 Page No 4 Prashant Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax remittance. Accordingly, in view of the Mumbai ITAT decisions in the case of PR Packaging in ITA number 2376/Mum/2022 and Kalpesh Synthetics 137 Taxmann.com 475 (Mumbai), this claim of deduction u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act cannot be disallowed u/s 143(1) of the Act (more specifically under sub-clause (d) to 143(1) of the Act). Secondly, the counsel argued that the issue at the time when the disallowance was made, issue was debatable and accordingly could not be the subject matter of disallowance und…

Paris Elysees India Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7, Jaipur

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

ITA 357/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Shri James Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,’A’ JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM deys’k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 357/JPR/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2018-19 cuke Deputy Commissioner of Income Paris Elysees India Private Limited A-135, Perfume Factory, Vs. Tax, Heerawala, RIICO Industrial Area, Circle-7, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCP4088P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Asse…

M/S. Nirmal Enviro Solutions Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1154/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojarishri Panati Vidyanath Reddy Vs Acit, Circle - 4(3)(1) 10, 32Nd Main, 5Th Cross Bengaluru Dollars Colony, Btm Layout 1St Stage, Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Afmpr3580F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Nirmal Enviro Solutsions P. Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle - 3(1)(1) 26, 9Th Cross, 16Th Main Bengaluru Btm Layout, 1St Stage Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Aadcn1064H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, Ca Revenue By: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023 O R D E R Per: Chandra Poojari, A.M.

For Appellant: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36Section 36(1)(va)

…1) of the Act is against the provisions of the Act as it would not fall within the ambit of prima facie adjustments. Our view is further fortified by the co-ordinate bench decision of this Tribunal in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd vs DCIT reported in 195 ITD 142 (Mum). The relevant portion of the decision is reproduced below:- “6. Coming to the mechanism of application of section 143(1), we find that the first proviso to section 143(1) mandates that "no such adjustments shall be made unless an intimation is given to the assessee of such adjustments either in writing or in electronic mode" and, under the…

Sri Panati Vidyanath Reddy, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1148/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojarishri Panati Vidyanath Reddy Vs Acit, Circle - 4(3)(1) 10, 32Nd Main, 5Th Cross Bengaluru Dollars Colony, Btm Layout 1St Stage, Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Afmpr3580F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Nirmal Enviro Solutsions P. Ltd. Vs Acit, Circle - 3(1)(1) 26, 9Th Cross, 16Th Main Bengaluru Btm Layout, 1St Stage Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Aadcn1064H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, Ca Revenue By: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.01.2023 O R D E R Per: Chandra Poojari, A.M.

For Appellant: Miss Sunaiana Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36Section 36(1)(va)

…1) of the Act is against the provisions of the Act as it would not fall within the ambit of prima facie adjustments. Our view is further fortified by the co-ordinate bench decision of this Tribunal in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd vs DCIT reported in 195 ITD 142 (Mum). The relevant portion of the decision is reproduced below:- “6. Coming to the mechanism of application of section 143(1), we find that the first proviso to section 143(1) mandates that "no such adjustments shall be made unless an intimation is given to the assessee of such adjustments either in writing or in electronic mode" and, under the…

Subramanya Karthik, Bhadravathi vs. ITO, Ward- 1 & Tps, Shimoga

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

ITA 1142/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2023AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri I. Dinesh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENGALURU (SMC) “A” BENCH, BENGALURU Before Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member Shri Subramanya Karthik vs The Income Tax Officer 6/252, Sri Dahanalakshmi Ward - 1 & TPS Enterprises, Paper Town Shri Gurunarasimha Krupa Bhadravathi 577302 1 Stage, Vinobanagar PAN – AUUPK7121J Shimoga 577204 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri I. Dinesh, Advocate Revenue by: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel Date of hearing: 18.01.2023 Date of pronouncement: 18.01.2023 O R D E R Per: Chandra Poojari, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A)/N…

Sri. P. Harshavardhana Reddy, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1016/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri, S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)Section 34(1)(iv)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…come) indicated in the audited report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return.” 10. The Tribunal in coming the aforesaid conclusion placed reliance on another Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd Vs. DCIT 195 ITD 142 (Mumbai) wherein the ITAT, Mumbai Bench took the view that where CPC while processing return u/s.143(1)(a) cannot disallow Employee's contributions (PF/ESI) claimed as deduction by an assessee-employer in respect of employee's contribution towards PF by invoking section 143(1)(iv)(a). The Tribunal held that the said disallowance was based on obse…

Tiberwala Electronics Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Circle -2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 425/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 246ASection 249(3)Section 36(1)(va)

…ade on either side. In the case of M/s P R Packaging Service (supra), the Bench while referring the provisions under section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act, in the light of the view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd vs DCIT reported in 195 ITD 142 (Mum), was of the opinion that the said clause (iv) would come into operation when the Tax Auditor had suggested for a disallowance of expense or increase in income, but the same had not been carried out by the assessee while filing the return of income; and that if the tax auditor had not stated to disallow Employees Contribution to Provident Fu…

Tiberwala Electronics Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Circle -2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 424/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 246ASection 249(3)Section 36(1)(va)

…ade on either side. In the case of M/s P R Packaging Service (supra), the Bench while referring the provisions under section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act, in the light of the view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd vs DCIT reported in 195 ITD 142 (Mum), was of the opinion that the said clause (iv) would come into operation when the Tax Auditor had suggested for a disallowance of expense or increase in income, but the same had not been carried out by the assessee while filing the return of income; and that if the tax auditor had not stated to disallow Employees Contribution to Provident Fu…

ACIT, Circle-49(1), Delhi vs. Aero Club, Delhi

In the result, all the three captioned appeals of the

ITA 2293/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Maninder Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

…he co-ordinate bench in the case of M/s P R Packaging Services [supra]. We find that the co- ordinate bench has not given any independent finding but has simply relied upon another decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd 195 ITD 142 wherein the co-ordinate bench has based its decision on the interpretation and binding decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. In the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd [supra], the Tribunal has held that the CPC Bengaluru cannot override the binding decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court while making the impugned disallowance o…

Krishan Pal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-34(1), Delhi

In the result, all the three captioned appeals of the

ITA 2250/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Maninder Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

…he co-ordinate bench in the case of M/s P R Packaging Services [supra]. We find that the co- ordinate bench has not given any independent finding but has simply relied upon another decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd 195 ITD 142 wherein the co-ordinate bench has based its decision on the interpretation and binding decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. In the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd [supra], the Tribunal has held that the CPC Bengaluru cannot override the binding decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court while making the impugned disallowance o…

Savleen Kaur, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-54 (4), Delhi

In the result, all the three captioned appeals of the

ITA 2249/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Maninder Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

…he co-ordinate bench in the case of M/s P R Packaging Services [supra]. We find that the co- ordinate bench has not given any independent finding but has simply relied upon another decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd 195 ITD 142 wherein the co-ordinate bench has based its decision on the interpretation and binding decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. In the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd [supra], the Tribunal has held that the CPC Bengaluru cannot override the binding decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court while making the impugned disallowance o…

B4S Solutions P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, all the three captioned appeals of the

ITA 2197/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Maninder Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

…he co-ordinate bench in the case of M/s P R Packaging Services [supra]. We find that the co- ordinate bench has not given any independent finding but has simply relied upon another decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd 195 ITD 142 wherein the co-ordinate bench has based its decision on the interpretation and binding decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. In the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd [supra], the Tribunal has held that the CPC Bengaluru cannot override the binding decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court while making the impugned disallowance o…

Itek Packz, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(4), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 995/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Dec 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Gale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)

…1) of the Act is against the provisions of the Act as it would not fall within the ambit of prima facie adjustments. Our view is further fortified by the co-ordinate bench decision of this Tribunal in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd vs DCIT reported in 195 ITD 142 (Mum). The relevant portion of the decision is reproduced below:- “6. Coming to the mechanism of application of section 143(1), we find that the first proviso to section 143(1) mandates that "no such adjustments shall be made unless an intimation is given to the assessee of such adjustments either in writing or in electronic mode" and, under the…

Mass Fab Technologies, Bangalore vs. CIT(Appeals), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by different assessees are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1079/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Dec 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Gale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)

…1) of the Act is against the provisions of the Act as it would not fall within the ambit of prima facie adjustments. Our view is further fortified by the co-ordinate bench decision of this Tribunal in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd vs DCIT reported in 195 ITD 142 (Mum). The relevant portion of the decision is reproduced below:- “6. Coming to the mechanism of application of section 143(1), we find that the first proviso to section 143(1) mandates that "no such adjustments shall be made unless an intimation is given to the assessee of such adjustments either in writing or in electronic mode" and, under the…

Sahrudaya Health Care (Kurnool) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 596/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Sahrudaya Health Care Vs. The Income Tax Officer, (Kurnool), Private Limited, Ward 3 (1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aawcs3735M. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Kumar Adithya. Date Of Hearing: 20.12.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.12.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Adithya
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…ade on either side. In the case of M/s P R Packaging Service (supra), the Bench while referring the provisions under section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act, in the light of the view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd vs DCIT reported in 195 ITD 142 (Mum), was of the opinion that the said clause (iv) would come into operation when the Tax Auditor had suggested for a disallowance of expense or increase in income, but the same had not been carried out by the assessee while filing the return of income; and that if the tax auditor had not stated to disallow Employees Contribution to Provident Fu…

Grip Strapping Technologies Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 249/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…ade on either side. In the case of M/s P R Packaging Service (supra), the Bench while referring the provisions under section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act, in the light of the view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt Ltd vs DCIT reported in 195 ITD 142 (Mum), was of the opinion that the said clause (iv) would come into operation when the Tax Auditor had suggested for a disallowance of expense or increase in income, but the same had not been carried out by the assessee while filing the return of income; and that if the tax auditor had not stated to disallow Employees Contribution to Provident Fu…