How many judgments cite Sagun Foundry Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT?

148 judgments on BharatTax cite Sagun Foundry Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (145 DTR 265), spanning 2019 to 2025.

Sagun Foundry Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

145 DTR 265High Court2017#671 most cited

What is Sagun Foundry Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B if paid before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1). This applies even if paid after the due date specified under the respective fund's statute.

148

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Sagun Foundry Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · Section 43B · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 139(1) · provident fund contribution · ESI contribution · employee contribution · employer contribution · due date for payment · deduction allowability

Judgments citing Sagun Foundry Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

M/S VARSHA CONSTRUCTION,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5/RPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 5/Rpr/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S Varsha Construction, V The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Second Floor-25, 26, Millenium Plaza, S Tax, Circle-1(1), Central Revenue Raipur-492 001, Chhattisgarh Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, C.G.. Pan: Aaefv 8399 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""थ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2025 : 22.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Mr. Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

…s, as under :- i. CIT Vs. Amil Ltd reported (2010) 321 ITR 508 (Delhi High Court) ii. CIT Vs. Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 167 (P&H) iii. Bihar State Warehousing Corporation Ltd.Vs. CIT 386 ITR 410 (Patna) iv. Sagun Foundary Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (All) v. CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries (2008) 358 ITR 43 (P&H) vi. CIT Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj) vii. Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (2014)366 ITR 408 (Kar) viii. CIT Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 396 (Cal) ix. CIT Vs. Kichha Sugar Co Ltd (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand) In the backdrop of the aforesa…

BRAHAM PARKASH YADAV,BHIWADI, ALWAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC)

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 439/JPR/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Kumar Garg (C.A.)For Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a

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

…(ITAT No. 41&42/Agr/2021 dated 14.06.2021) 2. Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company vs DCIT (ITAT No. 05/Jodh/2021) 3. Mohan Ram Choudhary v/s ITO (Jodhpur) 4. State Road Transport Corporation 366 ITR 170 (Gujrat H.C.) 5. Sagan Foundry P. Ltd. vs. CIT (145 DTR 265) (Allahabad H.C.) He further submitted that the above judgements have been delivered after judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. and have similar facts. The ld. AR also submitted that it is a settled law that where different views of two courts are same status then the view favourable to the assessee should pr…

INDORE BIOTECH INPUTS & RESEARCH P LTD ,INDORE vs. DCIT-CPC BANGLORE, BANGLORE

In the result, these appeals are allowed

ITA 115/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Indore12 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Indore Biotech Input & Cpc, Bangalore Research Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aabcp 0235 A Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti & Shri Vijay Bansal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Shyam Sunder Trivedi Cpc, Bangalore Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Actpt 3280 G Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Shri Pradeep Kumar Cpc, Bangalore Pariyani, Indore Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Afkpp 3296 G Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…us decisions of Hon’ble High Courts favouring the assessee. Some of the decisions relied upon by Ld. AR are mentioned below: (a) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in AIMIL Limited (2010) 321 ITR 508. (b) Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Sagun Foundary Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (c) Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in CIT Vs. Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd. / Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mill (2017) 250 Taxman 32 6.1 Ld. AR further submitted that the issue is also squarely covered in favour of the assessee by several decisions of this very Bench of ITAT. 6.2 Ld. AR also submitted that even otherwise the impugn…

SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR PARIYANI,INDORE vs. CIT(A) NFAC, DELHI

In the result, these appeals are allowed

ITA 165/IND/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

SHRI ASEEN JINDAL,BHOPAL vs. THE ADIT-CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 204/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Indore22 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Aseem Jindal Adit-Cpc Bhopal Bengaluru Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Afgpj 5199 C Assessee By Ms. Shraddha Piplodiya, Adv. Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2022 O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(iv)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…s decisions of Hon’ble High Courts favouring the assessee. Some of the decisions relied upon by Ld. AR are mentioned below: (a) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in AIMIL Limited (2010) 321 ITR 508. (b) Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Sagun Foundary Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (c) Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in CIT Vs. Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd. / Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mill (2017) 250 Taxman 32 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the issue is also squarely covered in favour of the assessee by decision of this very Bench of ITAT in the case of Nataraj Dal Mill, Indore vs. ACIT ITA No. 153/IND/2021…

RSG SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-20(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 1478/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Soni, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR) and Ms. Rajeshjwari R., JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…provisions and notifications. We also clarify that the assessee would be entitled to deduction in terms of Section 36(1)(va) of the Act." 10. We have also examined the decision of the Hon‘ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Sagun Foundry Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 145 DTR 265 wherein it was held that as the payments have been made before the due date specified u/s 139(1) and as such are fully allowable. The Hon‘ble High Court of Allahabad has considered the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation and held as under: “17. We find that with respect to employees contribution to Provident Fund, as to whether disa…

SHRI ASHOK RAO THORAT,PITHAMPUR DHAR vs. ADIT, CPC JURISDICTION WARD 1(4), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, assessee’s both appeals are allowed

ITA 92/IND/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Sept 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Moksh Solanki & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 91 & 92/Ind/2022 (Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20) Shri Ashok Rao Thorat Vs. Asst. Director of Income 1 Housing Colony, Tax Pithampur, Dhar, Madhya CPC, Bengaluru Pradesh - 454774 PAN No.ACRPT3355J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Moksh Solanki & Shri Pankaj Shah, A.Rs. Respondent by : Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.D.R. 16.09.2022 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 20.09.2022 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant two a…

SHRI ASHOK RAO THORAT,PITHAMPUR DHAR vs. ADIT, CPC JURISDICTION WARD 1(4), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, assessee’s both appeals are allowed

ITA 91/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Moksh Solanki & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.D.R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

MADHURAM PULSES PVT.LTD. ,INDORE vs. ACIT 5(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 82/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 Madhuram Pulses Pvt. Ltd. Acit 5(1) Indore Indore Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabcm 1270 G Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 20.09.2022 O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(iv)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ted in view of numerous decisions of Hon’ble High Courts favouring the assessee. Some of the decisions are mentioned below: (a) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in AIMIL Limited (2010) 321 ITR 508. (b) Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Sagun Foundary Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (c) Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in CIT Vs. Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd. / Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mill (2017) 250 Taxman 32 5. It is further observed that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by decision of this very Bench of ITAT in the case of Nataraj Dal Mill, Indore vs. ACIT ITA No. 153/IND/2021 or…

RAHUL SHARMA ,INDORE vs. DCIT /CPC , BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 77/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Mogra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.D.R

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

…sions passed by several judicial forums including the Coordinate Bench. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the orders are as follows: (a) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in AIMIL Limited (2010) 321 ITR 508. (b) Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Sagun Foundary Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (c) Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in CIT Vs. Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd. / Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mill (2017) 250 Taxman 32 (d) Shri Jai Singh Jadesa vs. DCIT (CPC) in ITA No. 214/Ind/2021 Ld. AR further submitted that the issue is also squarely covered in favour of the assessee by several decisions of this very Bench o…

SHRAMIK NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD,INDORE vs. DCIT-CPC, BANGALURU

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 201/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shramik Nagrik Sahakari Dcit,Cpc Bank Ltd. Bengaluru Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaajs 0383 E Assessee By Shri Sanket Mehta, Ar Shri Vijay Bansal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 15.09.2022 O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(iv)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…s decisions of Hon’ble High Courts favouring the assessee. Some of the decisions relied upon by Ld. AR are mentioned below: (a) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in AIMIL Limited (2010) 321 ITR 508. (b) Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Sagun Foundary Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (c) Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in CIT Vs. Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd. / Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mill (2017) 250 Taxman 32 4. The Ld. AR submitted that the issue is also squarely covered in favour of the assessee by decision of this very Bench of ITAT in the case of Nataraj Dal Mill, Indore vs. ACIT ITA No. 153/IND/2021…

APEX INSURANCE CONSULTANT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD -3(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 4748/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 4748/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Apex Insurance Consultant Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, 54, Basement Vinoba Puri, Lajpat Ward-3(1), Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-110024 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaeca3234H Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Kanav Bali, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.09.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Kanav Bali, CIT DR

Section 139(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…also clarify that the assessee would be entitled to deduction in terms of Section 36(1)(va) of the Act." 8 Apex Insurance Consultant Ltd. 10. We have also examined the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Sagun Foundry Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 145 DTR 265 wherein it was held that as the payments have been made before the due date specified u/s 139(1) and as such are fully allowable. The Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad has considered the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation and held as under: “17. We find that with respect to employees contribution to Provident Fund, as to whether disa…

SONA FASHIONS INC,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-29(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1217/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Memberassessment Year: 2018-19 Sona Fashions Inc. Vs. Ito, H 9, Mohan Coop. Industrial Ward-29(5), Estate, B1, Mathura Road, New Delhi South Delhi, New Delhi Pan :Aacfs7353L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…provisions and notifications. We also clarify that the assessee would be entitled to deduction in terms of Section 36(1)(va) of the Act." 10. We have also examined the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Sagun Foundry Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 145 DTR 265 wherein it was held that as the payments have been made before the due date specified u/s 139(1) and as such are fully allowable. The Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad has considered the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation and held as under: “17. We find that with respect to employees contribution to Provident Fund, as to whether disa…

M/S SAM STREAMLINE SYSTEMS P LTD ,INDORE vs. THE ITO 5 (1) , INDORE

In the result, these appeals are allowed

ITA 60/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…s decisions of Hon’ble High Courts favouring the assessee. Some of the decisions relied upon by Ld. AR are mentioned below: (a) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in AIMIL Limited (2010) 321 ITR 508. (b) Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in Sagun Foundary Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (c) Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in CIT Vs. Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd. / Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mill (2017) 250 Taxman 32 6.1 Ld. AR further submitted that the issue is also squarely covered in favour of the assessee by several decisions of this very Bench of ITAT. 6.2 Ld. AR also submitted that even otherwise the imp…

TORINO LABORATORIES P LTD,INDORE vs. DCIT/ / ACIT 4 (1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 6/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Torino Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Dcit/Acit-4(1), Indore Indore Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabct1347B Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 18.08.2022 O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(iv)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

PRASANNA CHANDRASHEKER SHETTY,MANDIDEEP vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 41/IND/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shri Prasanna Chandrashekher Asst. Director Of Income Tax Shetty, C/O. P. Mogra & Cpc, Bengaluru Associates Chartered Accountants, 203, D.M. Tower, Vs. Janjirwalla Square, 21/1 Race Course Road, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Ahxps2998B Appellant By Shri Pankaj Mogra, Ar Respondent By None Date Of Hearing 02.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 10.08.2022 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shri Prasanna Chandrashekher Asst. Director of Income Tax Shetty, C/o. P. Mogra & CPC, Bengaluru Associates Chartered Accountants, 203, D.M. Tower, Vs. Janjirwalla Square, 21/1 Race Course Road, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AHXPS2998B Appellant by Shri Pankaj Mogra, AR Respondent by None Date of Hearing 02.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement 10.08.2022 O…

M/S AAKASH GLOBAL FOODS P LTD,INDORE vs. DCIT CPC ,, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 15/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Aakash Global Foods Dcit Pvt. Ltd. Income-Tax, Cpc, Survey No.13/1/5,16/2,17/4, Bangalore Vs. Village Kumedi, Tehsil Sanwer, Indore(M.P.) (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aadca4544R Appellant By Shri Arpit Gaur, Ar Respondent By Shri Singi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 10.08.2022 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS.MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/s. Aakash Global Foods DCIT Pvt. Ltd. Income-Tax, CPC, Survey No.13/1/5,16/2,17/4, Bangalore Vs. Village Kumedi, Tehsil Sanwer, Indore(M.P.) (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AADCA4544R Appellant by Shri Arpit Gaur, AR Respondent by Shri Singi, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 28.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement 10.08.2022 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, J.M.: The instant a…

M/S EAGLE TECHSEC COMMUNICATION INDIA P LTD,INDORE vs. DCIT ,CPC , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 11/IND/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms.Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Eagle Techsec Dcit Communication India Pvt. Income-Tax, Cpc, Ltd., M-23, New Siyaganj, Bangalore Mal Godam Road, Behind Vs. Shastri Market, Indore, M. P. 452001 (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aacce4785D Appellant By Shri Anil Kamal Garg, Ca Respondent By Shri P. K. Singi, Addl. Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 27.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 10.08.2022 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS.MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/s. Eagle Techsec DCIT Communication India Pvt. Income-Tax, CPC, Ltd., M-23, New Siyaganj, Bangalore Mal Godam Road, Behind Vs. Shastri Market, Indore, M. P. 452001 (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AACCE4785D Appellant by Shri Anil Kamal Garg, CA Respondent by Shri P. K. Singi, Addl. CIT DR Date of Hearing 27.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement 10.08.2022 O R D E R…

M/S GURUJI PRODUCTS P LTD ,PITHAMPUR vs. DCIT CPC , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 10/IND/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms.Madhumita Roy & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Guruji Products Pvt. Dcit Ltd., 285, A.B. Road, Income-Tax, Cpc, Pigdamber, Mhow, Vs. Bangalore Pithampur, Mhow (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aadca4544R Appellant By Shri Anil Kamal Garg, Ar Respondent By Shri P. K. Singi, Addl. Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 27.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 10.08.2022 O R D E R

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS.MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/s. Guruji Products Pvt. DCIT Ltd., 285, A.B. Road, Income-Tax, CPC, Pigdamber, Mhow, Vs. Bangalore Pithampur, Mhow (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AADCA4544R Appellant by Shri Anil Kamal Garg, AR Respondent by Shri P. K. Singi, Addl. CIT DR Date of Hearing 27.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement 10.08.2022 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, J.M.: The instant appeal fil…

RAJAN BANQUET PVT.LTD.,MORADABAD vs. ACIT-1, MORADABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1427/DEL/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…provisions and notifications. We also clarify that the assessee would be entitled to deduction in terms of Section 36(1)(va) of the Act." 10. We have also examined the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Sagun Foundry Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 145 DTR 265 wherein it was held that as the payments have been made before the due date specified u/s 139(1) and as such are fully allowable. The Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad has considered the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation and held as under: “17. We find that with respect to employees contribution to Provident Fund, as to whether disa…

Showing 1–20 of 148 · Page 1 of 8

...