Modern Fibotex India Ltd. v. DCIT

212 ITR 496High Court1995#2020 most cited

What is Modern Fibotex India Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Adjustments under Section 143(1)(a) are limited to arithmetical errors or incorrect claims that are prima facie apparent from the information provided in the income tax return itself. The Assessing Officer cannot embark on an inquiry beyond the face of the return during summary assessment proceedings.

57

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Modern Fibotex India Ltd. v. DCIT · Section 143(1)(a) · Section 143(1) · scope of summary assessment · prima facie adjustments · incorrect claim in return · arithmetical error · intimation proceedings · assessment procedure

Also reported as

125 Taxmann 1002

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)(a)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)(iv)Section 10(10AA)Section 11Section 11(1)(e)Section 11(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 143(1a)section 143(1)(a)(iv)retrospective amendmentsection 3(b)section 36(1)(iv)section 143(1)(a)section 2(24)(x)section 10aasection 2(24)section 36(1)(va)section 10asection 43b

Judgments citing Modern Fibotex India Ltd. v. DCIT

Balakram Hiranand Lohana, Mumbai vs. ITO 42(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 3791/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainbalakram Hiranand Lohana Vs. Adit, Cpc, Bangalore. Flat No. 202, D Wing, Bldg. No. 8, Neelam Nagar Co-Op. Housing Society Gavanpada, Mulund (E), Mumbai – 400081. Pan/Gir No. Abmpl5168M (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 250

…aced on the following: (a) Commissioner of Income-tax vs. GVK Industries Ltd. [2023] 147 taxmann.com 281 (Telangana) [23-11-2022] ( b) CIT v. Manubhai M. Patel [2008] 296 ITR 143 (Guj.) (c) Calcutta High Court in Modern Fibotex India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [1995] 212 ITR 496 (d) Kluber Lubrication India (P.) Ltd. taxmann.com 161 (Bangalore (Bangalore - Trib.)[26-07-2024] VS. DCIT [2024] 166 Trib.)/[2024] 208 ITD 470 6 Balakram Hiranand Lohana, Mumbai. Even otherwise, when there are conflicting views/decisions; the one in favour of the assessee should be followed as held by Hon'ble Surpeme Court in the case of CIT…

Shree Sree Balananda Trust, Deoghar vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Dhanbad

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 16/RAN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi04 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryshree Sree Balananda Trust, I.T.O., Sri Sri Balananda Ashram, Karinabad, Exemption Ward, Vs. Deoghar, Dist.- Deoghar, Dhanbad. Jharkhand-841112 Pan No. Aabts 0579 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 11Section 13(9)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 154

…n that adjustment can be made only if there is information available in such return that prima facie a claim or allowance is inadmissible." The same view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. Union of India (2002) 258 ITR 1 wherein it has been held as under: "A bare reading of section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, makes it clear that if, on the basis of the return filed by the assessee, any tax or interest is found due after adjustments, as set out in the section, an intimation has to be sent to the assessee specifying the sum so payable. Similarly, if any re…

Shiv Vegpro Private Limited, Kota vs. PCIT-Udaipur, Udaipur

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

ITA 1014/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jan 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, (Adv.) &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, (CIT-DR)
Section 147Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,"B" JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठौड़ कमलेश जयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 1014/JPR/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2017-18 Shiv Vegpro Pvt. Ltd., SP-3, RIICO Agro Food Park, Ranpur, Kota . बनाम Vs. The PCIT, Udaipur. स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAJCS7629B अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Gargieya, (Adv.) & Shri Hemang Garg…

Smita S Mehta, Kolkata vs. Asst Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 599/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250Section 54F

…f the Act as proceedings 143(1) is a limited proceeding with respect to the arithmetical error and/or incorrect claim on the basis of any information in the return. He has cited the following decisions: i) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. vs. DCIT reported in [1995] 212 ITR 496 (Calcutta) ii) Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [2018] 93 taxmann.com 63 (Bombay) On the contrary, ld. DR supports the impugned order. 2. We have perused the case of the assessee and find that an order u/s 143(1) of the Act was passed by the CPC in which claim of deduction u/s 54F of the Act has been denied. We find that assessee filed…

Brahma Chandra Yadav, Uttar Pradesh vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer Range 17, Ward 2(1)(1), Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh

In the result, all these appeals are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3034/DEL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roybrahma Chandra Yadav Vs. Jurisdictional Assessing 1G 201 Awho Township, Officer Range-17, Gurjinder Vihar, Greater Ward 2(1)(1), Cgo, Noida, Gautam Buddha Complex-I Purani Hapur Nagar, Up-201310 Chungi, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – 201002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Abfpy5867K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Hemant Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…1 Brahma Chandra Yadav THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Brahma Chandra Yadav Vs. Jurisdictional Assessing 1G 201 AWHO Township, Officer Range-17, Gurjinder Vihar, Greater Ward 2(1)(1), CGO, Noida, Gautam Buddha Complex-I Purani Hapur Nagar, UP-201310 Chungi, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh – 201002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: ABFPY5867K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Hemant Jain, Adv. Respondent by : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 30.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement 29.11.2024 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant appea…

Samsung C and T Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT Circle 22(2) Delhi, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 2184/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

…1. Sayaji Iron & Engg. Co. 253 ITR 749 (Guj.) 2. United Glass Manufacturing Co. Ltd., 28 Taxmann.com 429 (SC) 3. Ansal Housing Limited 153 Taxmann.com 102 (Del-ITAT) 4. SCV & LLP Vs. DCIT, ITA No.1756/Del/2020, dated 17.08.2022 5. Samtel Colour Ltd., (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Delhi) 6. S.R.F. Charitable Trust Vs. Union of India [1992] 183 ITR 95 4 | P a g e AY: 2018-19 7. Strongly relying upon the observations of the first appellate authority, learned Departmental Representative submitted, since the Auditor has reported the expenditure in the column specified for capital and personal expenditure, the CPC has corre…

Kathleen Confectioners, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-32, Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1187/KOL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri N. S. Saini, Advocate & Shri SonuFor Respondent: Shri Loviesh Shelley, JCIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e of filing ITR (which in the instant case of appellant was 15.02.2021) is not to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) SamtelColor Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the H…

Vishnu Cotton Mills Ltd, 2017-18 vs. AO, Cir.11, Kol, Kolkata

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

ITA 489/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.488 & 489/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Vishnu Cotton Mills Ltd………...................................................……Appellant Narayanpur, P.O-Rajarhat, Gopalpur, W.B-700136. [Pan: Aabcv0405G] Vs. Ao, Circle-11, Kolkata..................................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Chirajit Goswami, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 03, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 26, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 29.03.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments. 3. The Issue Raised By The Assessee Has Come To Rest By The Recent Verdict Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ot to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. I.T.A No.488&489/Kol/2023 Assessment year: 2017-18 Vishnu Cotton Mills Ltd a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…

Vishnu Cotton Mills Ltd, 2017-18 vs. AO, Cir.11, Kol, Kolkata

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

ITA 488/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.488 & 489/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Vishnu Cotton Mills Ltd………...................................................……Appellant Narayanpur, P.O-Rajarhat, Gopalpur, W.B-700136. [Pan: Aabcv0405G] Vs. Ao, Circle-11, Kolkata..................................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Chirajit Goswami, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 03, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 26, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 29.03.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments. 3. The Issue Raised By The Assessee Has Come To Rest By The Recent Verdict Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ot to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. I.T.A No.488&489/Kol/2023 Assessment year: 2017-18 Vishnu Cotton Mills Ltd a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…

Vishash Agarwal, Tinsukia vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Dibrugarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 39/GTY/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.39/Gty/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Vishesh Agarwal…………………..……....….........…..........….…… Appellant C/O Assam Pushpak Travel Agency, Makum Road, Tinsukia, Assam – 786170. [Pan: Aghpa7072R] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Dibrugarh……………..….…..…...…..…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Soumendu Sekhar Das, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 20, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 20, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 17.03.2020 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e of filing ITR (which in the instant case of appellant was 15.02.2021) is not to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…

M/S M.P. Madhyam, Bhopal vs. The DCIT ( CPC ), Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 426/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234B

…IT (supra) has held in para 15 & 16 as under: Page 3 of 7 ITA No.424 & 426/Ind/2022 M.P. Madhyam Page 4 of 7 “15. Mr. Shah, learned Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of Modern Fibotex India Limited v. Dy. C.I.T., 212 ITR 496. In view of the Calcutta High Court when once notice under Section 143(2) has been issued there is no scope for Assessing Officer either to make prima facie adjustment on the basis of the return as filed or issue intimation under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act. Emphasis is given to the omission by the legislature with regard to savings of powers as…

M/S M.P. Madhyam, Bhopal vs. The DCIT ( CPC ), Bhopal

In the result, appeals of assessee for A

ITA 424/IND/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234B

…IT (supra) has held in para 15 & 16 as under: Page 3 of 7 ITA No.424 & 426/Ind/2022 M.P. Madhyam Page 4 of 7 “15. Mr. Shah, learned Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of Modern Fibotex India Limited v. Dy. C.I.T., 212 ITR 496. In view of the Calcutta High Court when once notice under Section 143(2) has been issued there is no scope for Assessing Officer either to make prima facie adjustment on the basis of the return as filed or issue intimation under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act. Emphasis is given to the omission by the legislature with regard to savings of powers as…

M/S. Add Construction, Guwahati vs. ACIT, Circle -1, Guwahati

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 14/GTY/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati22 Aug 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.12,13&14/Gau/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2020-21 M/S Add Construction….…........…..…………....................……….……Appellant C/O Rahul Raj Jain & Co., H.No.15, 1St Floor, Bye Lane-2, Shaktigarh Path, Bhangagarh, G.S. Road, Assam-781005. [Pan: Aaifa2627H] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Guwahati ……….…............…….......................…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N.T Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 26, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 22, 2023 Order Per Manish Borad: All These Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2018-19 To 2020-21 Are Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] All Dated 31.01.2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Common Issue Involved In All These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…allowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.12,13&14/Gau/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 to 2020-21 M/s Add Construction a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…

M/S. Add Construction, Guwahati vs. ACIT, Circle -1, Guwahati

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 13/GTY/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati22 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.12,13&14/Gau/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2020-21 M/S Add Construction….…........…..…………....................……….……Appellant C/O Rahul Raj Jain & Co., H.No.15, 1St Floor, Bye Lane-2, Shaktigarh Path, Bhangagarh, G.S. Road, Assam-781005. [Pan: Aaifa2627H] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Guwahati ……….…............…….......................…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N.T Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 26, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 22, 2023 Order Per Manish Borad: All These Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2018-19 To 2020-21 Are Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] All Dated 31.01.2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Common Issue Involved In All These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…allowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.12,13&14/Gau/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 to 2020-21 M/s Add Construction a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…

M/S. Add Construction, Guwahati vs. ACIT, Circle -1, Guwahati

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 12/GTY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati22 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. Nos.12,13&14/Gau/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 To 2020-21 M/S Add Construction….…........…..…………....................……….……Appellant C/O Rahul Raj Jain & Co., H.No.15, 1St Floor, Bye Lane-2, Shaktigarh Path, Bhangagarh, G.S. Road, Assam-781005. [Pan: Aaifa2627H] Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Guwahati ……….…............…….......................…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri N.T Sherpa, Jcit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 26, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 22, 2023 Order Per Manish Borad: All These Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Years 2018-19 To 2020-21 Are Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short Ld. “Cit(A)”] All Dated 31.01.2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Common Issue Involved In All These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…allowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.12,13&14/Gau/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 to 2020-21 M/s Add Construction a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…

Srg Earth Resources Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. Asst.DIT, CPC, Bengalure, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 287/KOL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 287/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Srg Earth Resources Private Limited Asst. Dit, Cpc, Bengaluru 16, Ganesh Chandra Avenue Vs Gandhi House, Dalhousie Kolkata - 700013 [Pan : Aajcs2276A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S. S. Dasgupta, Fca Revenue By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/05/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/07/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 10/01/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Sole Issue Involved In This Appeal Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments. 3. The Issue Raised By The Assessee Has Come To Rest By The Recent Verdict Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cit (2022) 143 Taxmann.Com 178 (Sc) Dated 12.10.2022 Wherein It Has Been Held That “Deduction U/S 36(1)(Va) In Respect Of Delayed Deposit

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Dasgupta, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT D/R
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e of filing ITR (which in the instant case of appellant was 15.02.2021) is not to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…

Weltech Facility Management Services (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-27(1), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand

ITA 265/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…2021) is not to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. Weltech Facility Management Ser. (P) Ltd. AY: 2018-19 & 2019-20 a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…

Raja & Mitsu Fashions, Kolkata vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru, Kolkata

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

ITA 472/KOL/2023[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.471&472/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Raja & Mitsu Fashions….…………………................................……Appellant 156A, Lelin Sarani, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700013. [Pan: Aaefr5072P] Vs. Acit, Cpc, Bengaluru...….…….............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 27, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 27, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 14.03.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e of filing ITR (which in the instant case of appellant was 15.02.2021) is not to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…

Raja & Mitsu Fashions, Kolkata vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru, Kolkata

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

ITA 471/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.471&472/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Raja & Mitsu Fashions….…………………................................……Appellant 156A, Lelin Sarani, 5Th Floor, Kolkata-700013. [Pan: Aaefr5072P] Vs. Acit, Cpc, Bengaluru...….…….............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 27, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 27, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 14.03.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Involved In These Appeals Is Relating To The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (Cpc) U/S 36(1)(Va) R.W.S. 2(24)(X) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments.

Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e of filing ITR (which in the instant case of appellant was 15.02.2021) is not to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…

Dalmia Laminators Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 187/KOL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Jun 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.187/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Dalmia Laminators Ltd.…………………................................……Appellant 130, Cotton Street, Burra Bazar, Kolkata-700007. [Pan: Aabcd1748C] Vs. Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata….…….............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri N. S. Saini & Priyanka Salarpuria, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 02, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 26, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 09.1.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer/Cpc On Account Of Delayed Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf/Esi I.E. After The Due Date As Provided Under The Respective Welfare Enactments. 3. The Issue Raised By The Assessee Has Come To Rest By The Recent Verdict Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs.

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…is not to be disallowed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. I.T.A No.187/Kol/2023 Assessment year: 2019-20 Dalmia Laminators Ltd a) CIT Vs. Hindustan Electrographite Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 48 (SC) (2000) 109 Taxman 342 (SC) b) Modern Fibotex India Ltd. Vs. DCIT (1995) 212 ITR 496 (Cal) c) Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. UOI (2002) 258 ITR 1 (Del) (2002) 125 Taxman 1002 (Delhi) d) ITO Vs. Gujarat Power Corpn. Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 217 (Gujarat) (2002) 122 Taxman 367 (Gujarat) e) CIT Vs. Vijayshree Ltd. (2014) 43 taxmann.com 396 (Calcutta High Court) 6. Admittedly, the issue on merits has been set at rest by the recent decision of the…