How many judgments cite M.M.Aqua Technologies Limited v. CIT?

308 judgments on BharatTax cite M.M.Aqua Technologies Limited v. CIT (436 ITR 582), spanning 2021 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does M.M.Aqua Technologies Limited v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 115JB, Section 8D, Section 80IA, Section 36(1)(vii).

M.M.Aqua Technologies Limited v. CIT

436 ITR 582Supreme Court of India2021#250 most cited

What is M.M.Aqua Technologies Limited v. CIT authority for?

Amendments to tax law that impose new obligations or change existing legal positions apply prospectively, even if stated to be "for the removal of doubts." The judgment also clarifies that deductions under Section 43B are allowed only on actual payment, overriding the mercantile system of accounting.

308

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2026.

Also referred to as

M.M.Aqua Technologies Ltd v. CIT · 436 ITR 582 · section 43B · section 14A · section 36(1)(va) · prospective amendment · retrospective amendment · clarificatory amendment · actual payment deduction · new obligation tax law.

Also reported as

129 Taxmann.com 145282 Taxmann 281

Sections most often in play

Section 14A Section 143(3)Section 115JB Section 8D Section 80IA Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 9(1)(ii)employees contribution to pf section 2(24)(x)section 2(24)clarificatory amendment section 36(1)(va)section 43b section 36(va)section 43b(b)section 43 section 36 assistant director

Judgments citing M.M.Aqua Technologies Limited v. CIT

ACIT, Mumbai vs. K Raheja Corp Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6083/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2020-21

For Respondent: Mr. Paresh Sondagar, CA

Section 11SSection 14A

…on the following ectively. In this regard the assessee has relied on the following ectively. In this regard the assessee has relied on the following decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court: decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court: a) MM Aqua Technologies Vs CIT (436 ITR 582) a) MM Aqua Technologies Vs CIT (436 ITR 582) b) Sedco Forex International Drilling Inc Vs CIT (279 ITR 310) b) Sedco Forex International Drilling Inc Vs CIT (279 ITR 310) b) Sedco Forex International Drilling Inc Vs CIT (279 ITR 310) Also, appellant has relied on various other Also, appellant has relied on various other decisions of High court a…

Sri. Chandrakant Shamappa Kontha, Hubli vs. DCIT, Circle-1 & Tps, Hubli

In the result both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2397/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 143Section 36Section 5

…1 April 2021 and will accordingly apply in relation to the assessment year 2021 – 22 and subsequent assessment years. 17. The assessee further placed reliance on the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of MM Aqua technologies Ltd versus CIT 2020 436 ITR 582 stating ITA No. 2396 & 2397/ bang/2024 A Y : 2019-20 & 2020-21 Shri Chandrakant Shamappa Kpntha Versus DCIT Circle (1) (1) & TPS Hubli that retrospective provisions in taxing statute which is " for the removal of doubts" cannot be presumed to be retrospective if it alters or change as the law as it earlier stood. 18. He further submitted that th…

Sri. Chandrakant Shamappa Kontha, Hubli vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1) & Tps, Hubli

In the result both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2396/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 143Section 36Section 5

ACIT, Mumbai vs. K Raheja Corporate Services Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 5350/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…Explanation inserted in Section 144 of the Act has been made effective from 01.04.2022 and therefore did not apply in the relevant AYs under consideration. Relying on the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MM Aqua Technologies Ltd Vs CIT (436 ITR 582)&CIT Vs Vatika Township Pvt Ltd (367 ITR 466), wherein it has been held that any legislation which imposes new obligation or new duties or a new levy shall have to be necessarily treated as prospective in nature. 38. We have heard both the parties. Firstly, we deem it fit to deal with the CBDT Circular No.5/2014 relied upon by the Revenue. It is…

ACIT, Mumbai vs. K Raheja Corporate Services Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 5349/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, SR DR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…Explanation inserted in Section 14A of the Act has been made effective from 01.04.2022 and therefore did not apply in the relevant AYs under consideration. Relying on the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MM Aqua Technologies Ltd Vs CIT (436 ITR 582)&CIT Vs Vatika Township Pvt Ltd (367 ITR 466), wherein it has been held that any legislation which imposes new obligation or new duties or a new levy shall have to be necessarily treated as prospective in nature. 38. We have heard both the parties. Firstly, we deem it fit to deal with the CBDT Circular No.5/2014 relied upon by the Revenue. It is…

DCIT, Circle 1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Aia Engineering Ltd, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, whereas, the

ITA 565/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Gupta1. आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.565/Ahd/2025 – Asst.Year 2014-15 2. आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.351/Ahd/2025 – Asst. Year 2014-15 1. The Dcit Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad – 380 015 बनाम / V/S. 2. Aia Engineering Ltd. 115, Gvmm Estate Odhav Road, Odhav Ahmedabad - 382 415 1. Aia Engineering Ltd. 115, Gvmm Estate Odhav Road, Odhav Ahmedabad – 382 415 2. The Dcit Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabca 2777 J (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 01/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Are Cross-Appeals, One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue Preferred Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)'] Dated 13/01/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act') For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-2015. Both The Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. First, We Take Up Revenue'S Appeal In Ita No.565/Ahd/2025 For Ay 2014-15 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 2(17)Section 250

…e "it is declared", "for the removal of doubts", "in order to make the intention of legislation clear", etc. Reliance is placed on the following: ➤ Sedeo Forex International Drill Inc. v. CIT [2005] 279 ITR 310 (SC) ➤ M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT-[2021) 436 ITR 582 (SC) ➤ PCIT v. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd. (2022) 448 ITR 674 (Delhi) ➤ CIT v. Vatika Township (P.) Ltd. 367 ITR 466 (SC) • Explanation 3 to S.37(1) was specifically inserted in statute book by Finance Act, 2022 to bring the violation of "laws outside India" within the purview of S.37(1) and overcome the judgements of Tribunals taking a view…

Aia Engineering Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, whereas, the

ITA 351/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Gupta1. आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.565/Ahd/2025 – Asst.Year 2014-15 2. आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.351/Ahd/2025 – Asst. Year 2014-15 1. The Dcit Circle-1(1)(1) Ahmedabad – 380 015 बनाम / V/S. 2. Aia Engineering Ltd. 115, Gvmm Estate Odhav Road, Odhav Ahmedabad - 382 415 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabca 2777 J (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 01/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Are Cross-Appeals, One By The Assessee & The Other By The Revenue Preferred Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)'] Dated 13/01/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act') For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-2015. Both The Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. First, We Take Up Revenue'S Appeal In Ita No.565/Ahd/2025 For Ay 2014-15 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 2(17)Section 250

…like "it is declared", "for the removal of doubts", "in order to make the intention of legislation clear", etc. Reliance is placed on the following: Sedeo Forex International Drill Inc. v. CIT [2005] 279 ITR 310 (SC) M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT-[2021) 436 ITR 582 (SC) PCIT v. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd. (2022) 448 ITR 674 (Delhi) CIT v. Vatika Township (P.) Ltd. 367 ITR 466 (SC) • Explanation 3 to S.37(1) was specifically inserted in statute book by Finance Act, 2022 to bring the violation of "laws outside India" within the purview of S.37(1) and overcome the judgements of Tribunals taking a view that…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Delhi vs. Acb (India) Power Ltd

ITA/331/2025HC Delhi22 Aug 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

Section 14A

…rospective irrespective of the fact that the phrases used are 'it is declared' or 'for the removal of doubts'." (emphasis supplied) 7. The aforesaid proposition of law has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in M. M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 436 ITR 582 (SC) ; 2021 SCC OnLine SC 575. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow (page 597 of 436 ITR) : This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/08/2025 at 12:41:…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Delhi vs. Acb (India) Power Ltd

ITA - 331 / 2025HC Delhi22 Aug 2025

Section 14A

Zodiac Ventures Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer- 11 (3) (1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4135/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. C. Tiwari, AR

Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 199Section 250

…e fact that the phrases used are "it is declared" or "for the removal of doubts".' (emphasis supplied) 7. The aforesaid proposition of law has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 129 taxmann.com 145/282 Taxman 281/436 ITR 582. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:— "22. Second, a retrospective provision in a tax act which is "for the removal of doubts" cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language 8 ITA 4135/Mum/2025 Zodiac Ventures Ltd. is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Chennai

Appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2901/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2900 & 2901/Chny/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2013-14)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…e fact that the phrases used are "it is declared" or "for the removal of doubts".'(emphasis supplied) 7. The aforesaid proposition of law has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 129 taxmann.com 145/282 Taxman 281/436 ITR 582. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:- "22. Second, a retrospective provision in a tax act which is "for the removal of doubts" cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. v. C…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Chennai

Appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2900/CHNY/2024[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.V.Justin, CITFor Respondent: Mr. S.Muralidhar, FCA &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144Section 14ASection 263

…e fact that the phrases used are "it is declared" or "for the removal of doubts".' (emphasis supplied) 7. The aforesaid proposition of law has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 129 taxmann.com 145/282 Taxman 281/436 ITR 582. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:— "22. Second, a retrospective provision in a tax act which is "for the removal of doubts" cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. v. CI…

Grasim Industries Ltd ( Corporate Finance Division), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

ITA 3762/MUM/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal preferred by the Assessee vide order, dated 18/05/2009. 4. Not being satisfied with the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A), the Assessee has preferred appeal before this Tribunal. The Revenue has also filed cross-appeal challenging the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A).

For Appellant: Shri J. D. Mistry Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kishor Dhule

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 43B

…hem in the relevant previous year. It was to stop this mischief that section 43B was inserted." xx xx 42. The rationale for introduction of section 43B was explained by this court in M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 129 taxmann.com 145/282 Taxman 281/436 ITR 582 (SC)/2021 SCC Online SC 575 "19. The object of section 43B, as originally enacted, is to allow certain deductions only on actual payment. This is made clear by the non-obstante clause contained in the beginning of the provision, coupled with the deduction being allowed irrespective of the previous years in which the liability to pay such sum was…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Madurai

Appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2884/CHNY/2024[2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.2883 & 2884/Chny/2024. (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2018-2019 & 2020-2021) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Income Tax, 47, Psk Nagar, Corporate Circle, Rajapalayam 626 108. Madurai [Pan Aaacr 5284J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. S. Muralidhar & Shri J. Prabhakar, F.C.As. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. S. Muralidhar and Shri JFor Respondent: Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. CIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…e fact that the phrases used are "it is declared" or "for the removal of doubts".' (emphasis supplied) 7. The aforesaid proposition of law has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 129 taxmann.com 145/282 Taxman 281/436 ITR 582. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:— "22. Second, a retrospective provision in a tax act which is "for the removal of doubts" cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. v. CI…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Ramco Industries Limited, Rajapalayam

Appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2883/CHNY/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2025

For Appellant: Shri. S. Muralidhar and Shri JFor Respondent: Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. CIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…e fact that the phrases used are "it is declared" or "for the removal of doubts".' (emphasis supplied) 7. The aforesaid proposition of law has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 129 taxmann.com 145/282 Taxman 281/436 ITR 582. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:— "22. Second, a retrospective provision in a tax act which is "for the removal of doubts" cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. v. CI…

Muthu Thevar Nagarajan, Dindigul vs. ITO, Ward-1., Dindigul

Appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2083/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri. S. Muralidhar and Shri JFor Respondent: Shri. R. Bhoopathi, Addl. CIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…e fact that the phrases used are "it is declared" or "for the removal of doubts".' (emphasis supplied) 7. The aforesaid proposition of law has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 129 taxmann.com 145/282 Taxman 281/436 ITR 582. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:— "22. Second, a retrospective provision in a tax act which is "for the removal of doubts" cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood. This was stated in Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. v. CI…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Welspun Steel Limited, Gujarat

Accordingly, Ground No.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3862/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay NagpalFor Respondent: Dr.Kishor Dhule

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 250

…nguishable on facts and 4 Assessment Year 2016-2017 could not be applied to interpret the amendments introduced in Section 14A by the Finance Act 2022. Relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Vs CIT, Delhi-III: 436 ITR 582 (SC) and CIT(Central), New Delhi Vs Vatika Township (P.) Ltd: 367 ITR 466 (SC), the Ld. Authorised Representative for the Assessee submitted that merely the use of expression ‘for the removal of doubts’ or ‘shall be deemed never to have applied’ does not lead to a conclusion that the amendments are to applied to be applied retrospectively. He sub…

Multiple Concrete Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-10(3), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 341/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm & Shri Rakesh Mishra, Am Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(3), Multiple Concrete Pvt. Ltd. 13, Dum Dum Road, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Kolkata-700 074 P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcm7885R Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Ms. Puja Somani, Ars Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan &For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JM AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, AM Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(3), Multiple Concrete Pvt. Ltd. 13, Dum Dum Road, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Kolkata-700 074 P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AABCM7885R Assessee by : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Ms. Puja Somani, ARs Revenue by : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, DR Date of hearing: 06.08.2024 Date of pronouncement : 30.08.2024 O R D E R PER SONJOY SARMA, JM: 01. The caption appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, De…

Tata International Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 14(3)1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground no

ITA 1195/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Dhivya Ruth SR.DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…rastructure India Ltd (2022) 141 taxmann.com 289 (Delhi). The relevant paragraphs are reproduced as below: - ―7. The aforesaid proposition of law has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in MM. Aqua Technologies v.CIT [2021] 129 taxmann.com 145/282 Taxman 281/436 ITR 582. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow: - "22. Second, a retrospective provision in a tax act which is "for the removal of doubts" cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or changes the law as earlier stood. This was stated in Sedco Forex International Drill Inc. v. CIT…

Kamakshi Jute Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. Dcic, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, ITA No. 1073/KOL/2023 is dismissed

ITA 1073/KOL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Feb 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sri Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…statutory due date. ► On the other hand, the object of Section 43B, as noted in a series of earlier SC rulings in Allied Motors (P.) Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income-tax [(1997) 224 ITR 677], Exide Industries [(2020) 425 ITR 1], M. M. Aqua Technologies [(2021) 436 ITR 582] is to curb the practice of taxpayers who did not discharge their statutory liabilities (including employer’s contributions to SSS) for long periods but claimed deductions in that regard from their income on the ground that the liability to pay these amounts was incurred by them in the relevant tax year. Page 4 of 7 I.T.A. No.: 1073/KOL/2023 As…