Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. v. DCIT

100 Taxmann.com 244High Court2018#859 most cited

What is Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

The scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different; therefore, these provisions cannot be read together for determining the deduction of belatedly paid employee contributions. To assess the allowability of such a deduction, only Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) applies.

121

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Unifac Management Services v. DCIT · Section 43B · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 2(24)(x) · employee contribution deduction · belated payment · PF ESI · due date payment · scope of 43B and 36(1)(va)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(c)section 2(24)(x)section 36(1)(va)section 43bsection 2(24)section 36(1)section 43section 36section 139(1)section 139section 143(1)section 13

Judgments citing Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. v. DCIT

Sree Ambal Processors Private Limited, Tirupur vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) -Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…n of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Sharadha Terry Products Private Ltd, Mettuapalaym vs. ACIT, CPC, Bangalore

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 29/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2019-20
Section 139(1)Section 253(4)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Sharadha Terry Products Private Ltd, Mettupalayam vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 28/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19
Section 139(1)Section 253(4)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Sree Ambal Processors Private Limited, Tirupur vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) -Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…n of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Anjapparchettinad Ac Restaurant Madurai LLP, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 1(3), Chennai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 174/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2019-20
Section 139(1)Section 253(4)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Sree Gokulam Chit and Finance Co. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 17/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2019-20
Section 139(1)Section 253(4)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Sky Cotex India Private Limited, Tirupur vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 151/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yeshwanth Kumar (CA) -Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…n of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Venus Rubbers, Coimbatore vs. ADIT, Bangalore

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 147/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 139(1)Section 253(4)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Venus Rubbers, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 146/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 139(1)Section 253(4)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Avan Global Solutions Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, CPC/1718/U6/1957321506, Chennai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 145/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 139(1)Section 253(4)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Raksha Technologies Private Limited, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 14/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri G. Natrajan (Advocate) & Mrs. RFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…n of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

The Madras Silks India Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Circle 1, Tirupur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 134/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2017-2018

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…n of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Vaiyapuri Venkatasubramanian, Thiruppur vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 121/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 139(1)Section 253(4)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

M/S Imperial Granites Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 104/CHNY/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Section 139(1)Section 253(4)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

M/S Gbr Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward2(2), Chennai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 103/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19
Section 139(1)Section 253(4)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

M/S Rane Brake Lining Limited, Chennai vs. ADIT, CPC, Banglore

The appeals stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 101/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocate) -Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 44A

…n of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Amazing Export Corporation, Palladam vs. DCIT, CPC, Benguluru

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 100/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19
Section 139(1)Section 253(4)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. However, in later decision titled as Unifac Management Services (India) P. Ltd. V/s DCIT (100 Taxmann.com 244; 23.10.2018), the single judge bench of Hon’ble Court has held that the scope of Section 43B and Section 36(1)(va) are different and thus, there is no question of reading both provisions together to consider as to whether assessee-employer is entitled to deduction in respect of sum belatedly paid towards employee contribution and therefor…

Klmm Hospital Private Limited, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 227/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.227/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Klmm Hospital Private Ltd Vs. Income Tax Officer 29-14-58, Prakasam Road Ward - 1(1) Surya Rao Peta Visakhapatnam Vijayawada [Pan : Aadck4136F] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri PV Madhusudana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri SPG Mudaliar, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…आयकरअपीऱीयअधिकरण, विशाखापटणम पीठ, विशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्िूरु आर एऱ रेड्डी, न्याययक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बाऱाकृष्णन, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.227/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) KLMM Hospital Private Ltd Vs. Income Tax Officer 29-14-58, Prakasam Road Ward - 1(1) Surya Rao Peta Visakhapatnam Vijayawada [PAN : AADCK4136F] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri PV M…

Lohman Castings Private Limited, Anakapalle vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Anakapalle

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.140/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Lohman Castings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer C5 To C7, Nh-5 Ward-1 Industrial Development Area Anakapalle Anakapalle [Pan : Aaacl5905E] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri SPG Mudaliar, DR
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

…आयकरअपीऱीयअधिकरण, विशाखापटणम पीठ, विशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्िूरु आर एऱ रेड्डी, न्याययक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बाऱाकृष्णन, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.140/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Lohman Castings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer C5 to C7, NH-5 Ward-1 Industrial Development Area Anakapalle Anakapalle [PAN : AAACL5905E] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri C.Subrah…

Rukmani Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 358/CTK/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.358/Ctk/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Rukmani Infra Projects Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar Plot No.251, District Centre, C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar-16 Pan No. : Aaecr 1585 L (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None : Shri Manoj Kumar Goutam, Cit-Dr राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08/03/2022 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Has Been Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, Dated 16.06.2017, For The Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Extracted From The Available Records Are That, The Assessee, A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956, Engaged In The Business Of Erection, Commissioning, Technical & Maintenance Service To Different Power Plants. The Return Of Income For The Ay 2013-14 Was Filed By The Assessee On 01.10.2013 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,65,91,030/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected Under Cass. Notice U/S 143(2) & 143(1) Were Issued & Served On The Assessee. Assessment Proceedings Were Completed By The Ao & Concluded With An Addition Of Rs.3,58,95,574/- Under Four Different

For Appellant: None
Section 143(2)Section 68

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK श्री चन्द्र मोहन गगग, न्द्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अरुण खोड़पऩया, ऱेखा सदस्य के समऺ । BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.358/CTK/2017 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Rukmani Infra Projects Ltd., Vs ACIT, Circle-1(2), Bhubaneswar Plot No.251, District Centre, C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar-16 PAN No. : AAECR 1585 L (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee by : None : Shri Manoj Kumar Goutam, CIT-DR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by सुनवाई की तारीख…