How many judgments cite Revenue. 15. In CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma?

88 judgments on BharatTax cite Revenue. 15. In CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma (297 ITR 320), spanning 2008 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Revenue. 15. In CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 139, Section 143(3), Section 36(1)(va), Section 43B, Section 2(24)(x), Section 143(1).

Revenue. 15. In CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma

297 ITR 320High Court2008#1282 most cited

What is Revenue. 15. In CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma authority for?

Employees' contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified under the respective Acts, are allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the return of income under section 139(1).

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma · 297 ITR 320 · section 36(1)(va) · section 43B · employees contribution provident fund · employees contribution ESI · due date for payment · deductibility of payments · Alom Extrusions · AIMIL · Delhi High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 139 Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B Section 2(24)(x)Section 143(1)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

specified fund section 158be section 113 section 92f clarificatory amendment retrospective amendment section 158bb section 2(24)(x)section 36(1)(va)section 43b section 36(1)section 2(24)

Judgments citing Revenue. 15. In CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma

Multivision Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2138/AHD/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

For Respondent: Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr.D.R

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘,Lk lh‘ अहमदाबाद । ,Lk ,Lk-,e ,Lk ,e ,e-lh ,e lhlh IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ SMC ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD loZJh egkohj izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa vejthr loZJh egkohj izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa vejthr flag] ys[kk lnL; ds le{kA loZJh egkohj izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa vejthr loZJh egkohj izlkn] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa vejthr flag] ys[kk lnL; ds le{kA flag] ys[kk lnL; ds le{kA flag] ys[kk lnL; ds le{kA (BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2138/Ahd/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13) M/s. Multivision Pvt. L…

DCIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Foods and Inns Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the cross objection of assessee stands allowed

ITA 4577/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Aug 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ajay SinghFor Respondent: Ms.Pooja Swaroop

Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)

…assessee referred to several case laws as under:- (i) CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (Delhi High Court) 312 ITR 508 (ii) Vinay Cements 213 CTR 268 (SC) CO. No.87/Mum/2017 M/s.Foods and Inns Limited. (iii) Alom Extrusions Ltd. (2009) 309 ITR 306 (SC) (iv) Dharmendra Sharma 297 ITR 320 (Del.) (v) P.M.Electronics Ltd. 313 ITR 161 (Del.) (vi) CIT v. Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd. 366 ITR 1 (Bom.) (vii) CIT v. Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. 233 ITR 530 (Bom.) (viii) CIT v. Magus Customers Dialog Pvt.Ltd. 371 ITR 244 (Kar) 7.2 Considering the above, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition. 7.3 Against the above order, the Revenue is i…

Ekta Agro Industries Ltd vs. Income Tax Officer

ITA - 1246 / 2008HC Delhi23 Dec 2009

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

…_Picture_1.jpeg) - 14. When we keep that proposition in mind and also ta consideration various judgments where *Vinay Cement* (supra) is applied and followed, it will not be possible to accept the contention of the Revenue. - 15. In CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma, 297 ITR 320, this Court specifically dealt with this issue and relying upon the aforesaid judgment of the Guwahati High Court, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in Vinay Cement (supra), the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed. More detailed discussion is contained in another judgment of this Court in CIT v. P.M. Electronics Ltd. (ITA No. 475/2007 decided on 3…

Spearhead Digital Studio P.Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA - 755 / 2008HC Delhi23 Dec 2009

Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 438

…igh Court of Guwahati. - When we keep that proposition in mind and also to 14. consideration various judgments where Vinay Cement (supra) is applied and followed, it will not be possible to accept the contention of the Revenue. - In CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma, 297 ITR 320, this Court specifically 15. dealt with this issue and relying upon the aforesaid judgment of the Guwahati High Court, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in Vinay Cement (supra), the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed. More detailed discussion is contained in another judgment of this Court in CIT v. P.M. Electronics Ltd. (ITA No. 475/2007 decided…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. AIMIL Limited

ITA-1063/2006HC Delhi23 Dec 2009

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

…hati. 14. When we keep that proposition in mind and also take into consideration various judgments where Vinay Cement (supra) is applied and followed, it will not be possible to accept the contention of the Revenue. 15. In CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma, 297 ITR 320, this Court specifically dealt with this issue and relying upon the aforesaid judgment of the Guwahati High Court, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in Vinay Cement (supra), the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed. More detailed discussion is contained in another judgment of this Court in CIT v. P.M. Electronics Ltd. (ITA No. 475/2007 decide…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Modipon Ltd

ITA - 78 / 2009HC Delhi23 Dec 2009

Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

…oted observations. The reasons are given and, thus, it amounts to affirmation of the view taken by the High Court of Cuwahati. 13. 2009:DHC:8594-DB 14. When we keep that consideration various applied and followed, ofthe Revenue. ln CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma, 297 ITR 320, this Court specifically dealt with this issue and relying upon the aforesaid judgment of the Cuwahati High Court, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in Vinay Cement(supra), the appeal of the Revenue *u, dismissecl. More detailed discussion is contained in another judgment of this Court in clT v. P.M. Electronis Ltd. (lTA No. 475/2007 decided on 3.…

Commissioner of Income Tax V vs. P.M.Electronics Ltd

ITA - 475 / 2007HC Delhi03 Nov 2008

Section 1Section 139Section 143(1)(A)Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(x)Section 260ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…unal deserves to be sustained as it is no longer res integra in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v Vinay Cement Ltd: 213 ITR 268 which has been followed by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of CIT v. Dharmendra Sharma: 297 ITR 320. 8. Despite the aforesaid judgments, the learned counsel for the Tribunal has contended that in view of the judgment of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Synergy Financial Exchange Ltd: (2007)288 ITR 366 and that of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. M/s Pamwi Tissues Ltd: (20…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-V vs. P M Electronics Ltd

ITA/475/2007HC Delhi03 Nov 2008

Section 1Section 139Section 143(1)(A)Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(x)Section 260ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B