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.

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

152 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 265)

Ashirwad Carbonics (India) Private Limtied, New Delhi vs. Circle-3(1), Delhi

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

ITA 1721/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2019-20

Section 139(1)Section 36Section 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. Rupani Footcare Private Limited, Kanpur Nagar vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 146/LKW/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S Rupani Footcare V. The Income Tax Officer Private Limited Ward 2(3)(1) 122/334, Shastri Nagar Kanpur Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aaecr1354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 17 05 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 05 2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI. A. D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/s Rupani Footcare v. The Income Tax Officer Private Limited Ward 2(3)(1) 122/334, Shastri Nagar Kanpur Kanpur TAN/PAN:AAECR1354B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent by: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date of hearing: 17 05 2022 Date of pronouncement: 30 05 2022 O R D E R PER A.D. JAIN, V.P.: This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, New Delhi, dated 9.11.2021, for Assessment Year 2019…

Bhagwanti Rubber and Allied Products Private Limited, Kanpur vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 31/LKW/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 May 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoor

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

…I.T.A. No.31/Lkw/2022 Assessment year:2019-20 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘SMC’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.31/Lkw/2022 Assessment year:2019-20 M/s Bhagwanti Rubber and Allied Vs. Dy.C.I.T., Products Private Limited, Circle-2(1)(1), E-4, Site-1, Kanpur. Kanpur. PAN:AAACB5732D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri P. K. Kapoor, C. A. Respondent by Shri Harish Gidwani, D. R. Date of hearing 19/05/2022 Date of pronouncement 26/05/2022 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of learned CIT(A) dated 16/12/2021. In this…

Shivganga Drillers P Ltd, Indore vs. CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 174/IND/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jain & Shreya Jain, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 199Section 234BSection 36

…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 A.Y. 2017-18 Page 7 of 14 The Ld. AR further 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, Indor…

Steel Bird International, New Delhi vs. JCIT, Range- 63, New Delhi

ITA 1573/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 1573/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Steel Bird International, Vs Jcit, 2E/3, Jhandewalan Extn., Range-63, New Delhi-110055 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabfs7296K Assessee By : Sh. Vikas Katyal, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Shashi Kajle, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.05.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Vikas Katyal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Shashi Kajle, Sr. DR

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

…ns. 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 8 Steel Bird International 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…

Spn Associates, Haryana vs. DCIT Circle 3(1), Haryana

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 483/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR

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

…is covered by various orders of the co-ordinate Benches of Tribunal. 5. Further, I find that the issue stands decided in favour of the assessee by Hon’ble Allahabad High Court and Delhi High Court in the following decisions : Sagun Foundry (P) Ltd., vs. CIT, 145 DTR 265 (All) has held in favour of the assessee and adjudged that; “By way of First Proviso Section 43-B, an incentive/relaxation was sought to be given in respect of tax, duty, cess or fee by explicitly stating that if such tax duty cess or fee is paid before the date of filing of the return under Act 1961, Assessee would then be entitled to deduction.…

Spn Associates, Haryana vs. DCIT Circle 3(1), Haryana

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 481/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR

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

…is covered by various orders of the co-ordinate Benches of Tribunal. 5. Further, I find that the issue stands decided in favour of the assessee by Hon’ble Allahabad High Court and Delhi High Court in the following decisions : Sagun Foundry (P) Ltd., vs. CIT, 145 DTR 265 (All) has held in favour of the assessee and adjudged that; “By way of First Proviso Section 43-B, an incentive/relaxation was sought to be given in respect of tax, duty, cess or fee by explicitly stating that if such tax duty cess or fee is paid before the date of filing of the return under Act 1961, Assessee would then be entitled to deduction.…

Orient Craft Ltd., Delhi vs. Asst. DIT, CPC, Bangalore

ITA 477/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 477/Del/2022 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Orient Craft Ltd., Vs Asstt. Dit, C/O M/S Rra Taxindia, Cpc, D-28, South Extension, Bangalore Part-I, New Delhi-110049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco0068M Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.05.2022

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. DR

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

…fications. 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 8 Orient Craft Ltd. 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…