← All Phrases

“employees contribution to PF”

DisallowancesSection 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(va)638 judgments

The decision most relied on for employees contribution to PF is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on employees contribution to PF

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.
321 ITR 508 · 2010 · High Court
1,629
citing judgments

Employee contributions to PF and ESIC, deposited beyond the due date under the respective Acts but within the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1), are allowable deductions under Section 36(1)(va). Such disallowance cannot be made during processing under Section 143(1).

Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
143 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · Supreme Court
1,392
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI deposited by an employer beyond the due dates prescribed under the respective special Acts are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Such disallowance can be made during processing under section 143(1).

CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd.
319 ITR 306 · 2009 · Supreme Court
1,344
citing judgments

A proviso inserted into a section to remedy unintended consequences, make the section workable, or supply an obvious omission must be read retrospectively in operation to give effect to the section as a whole.

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation
366 ITR 170 · 2014 · High Court
1,158
citing judgments

Employees' contributions to welfare funds, such as provident fund, are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) if deposited beyond the due date prescribed under the respective welfare statutes, even by a single day. Such delayed deposits are not cured even if made before the income-tax return filing due date.

(i) CIT v. Merchem Ltd.
378 ITR 443 · 2015 · High Court
631
citing judgments

Belated remittance of employees' contribution to ESI and PF, even if deposited before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1), is not allowed as a deduction. This disallowance falls under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x), as Section 43B applies only to employer's contributions.

CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.
368 ITR 749 · 2014 · High Court
609
citing judgments

Deduction for employees' contributions to PF and ESIC is allowable under Section 43B if paid before the due date for filing the return under Section 139(1); similarly, delayed deposits of employers' contributions to ESIC and PF are also allowable.

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn
41 Taxmann.com 100 · 2014 · High Court
540
citing judgments

Employees' contributions to provident fund or other welfare funds are deductible under section 36(1)(va) only if paid by the due date specified in the respective welfare fund enactments, and section 43B does not extend this period to the income tax return filing due date under section 139(1).

CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur
43 Taxmann.com 411 · 2014 · High Court
524
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund, ESI, and other welfare funds, if deposited by the due date for furnishing the return of income under Section 139(1), are allowable as a deduction and cannot be disallowed under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) or Section 43B, even if deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective welfare Acts.

Judgments citing employees contribution to PF

Arnold Consulting Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 712/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Akshaya K.S., A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

wherein the disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. 3. The assessee challenged the above said addition by filing appeal ... Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before us. 4. The learned AR submitted that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contributions were paid in few instances beyond the due date prescribed

Zynga Game Network India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 693/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.M/S. Zynga Game Network Vs Dcit, Circle -7(1)(1) India Pvt. Ltd. Bmtc Building, 80 Feet Road No. 19, Prestige Falcon Tower Koramangala 4Th & 5Th Floor, Brunton Bengaluru 560095 Road, Richmond Town Bengaluru 560025 Pan – Aaacz3937G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ankur Pai, Advocate Revenue By: Shri K.R. Narayan, Addl. Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/09/2022 O R D E R Per: Padmavathy, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi In Appeal No. Nfac/2019-20/10054666 Dated 16.06.2022 For Ay 2020-21. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “1. The Learned Assistant Director Of Income Tax, Cpc / Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) ["Cit(A)"] Has Erred In Disallowing The Delayed Remittance Of The Employees Contribution To Pf Without Appreciating That The Appellant Had Remitted The Same Before The Due Date For Filing Of Return Of Income Under Section 139(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Ankur Pai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayan, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC / Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ["CIT(A)"] has erred in disallowing the delayed remittance of the employees contribution to PF without appreciating that the Appellant had remitted the same before the due date for filing of return of income under section ... filing return of income, the same cannot be disallowed. 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that delay in deposit of employees' contribution to PF will not be allowed based on the amendment brought in by the Finance Act, 2021, without appreciating the fact that the amendment

Sri Rajanikanth Reddy, Bengaluru vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 577/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.Shri Rajanikanth Reddy Vs The Income Tax Officer- 4(2)(2) No.21, 14Th Main, Venkateshwara Bengaluru Layout, Madiwala Bengaluru 560068 Pan – Ablpr5981K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Advocate Revenue By: Shri K.R. Narayan, Addl. Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 13/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/09/2022 O R D E R Per: Padmavathy, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi In Appeal No. Cit(A)/Bengaluru-4/10069/2020-21 Dated 25.05.2022 For Ay 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: - “1. The Order Of The Authorities Below In So Far As They Are Against The Appellant Are Opposed To Law, Equity, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax [Appeals] / National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac For Short] Is Not Justified In Upholding The Determination Of Total Income Of Appellant In The Order U/S. 154 Of The Act, At Rs. 1,92,26,970/- As Against The Returned Income Of Rs. 1,09,63,817/-, Under The Normal Provisions, On Account Of The Disallowance Of Rs. 82,63,148/- Made U/S.36[1][Va] Of The Act, Based Upon The Details In The Tax Audit

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayan, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234ASection 234BSection 36Section 43BSection 44A

made addition to the returned income under Section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act on account of delayed payment of employee contribution to PF and ESI vide order dated 08.01.2020. Subsequently CPC passed a rectification order u/s.154 dated 10.02.2020 revising the interest charged u/s.234B of the Act. Aggrieved ... jurisdictional High Court in the case of EssaeTeraokaPvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (supra)¸ had held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI provided that the payments were made prior to the due date of filing of the return of income

Sri Family Biznet Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 590/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Sept 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: --- None ---For Respondent: Smt.Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

assessed loss u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act was on account of disallowance of sum of Rs.23,57,155 being late remittance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under the respective Acts. 4. Aggrieved by the intimation u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before ... first appellate authority. It was stated that the assessee had paid the employees’ contribution to PF and ESI prior to the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. Therefore, it was submitted that the assessee is entitled to deduction of employees’ contribution to PF

Mr. G R Chandrashekar Naidu, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 677/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore06 Sept 2022AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Gala Ranga, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.K.R.Narayanan, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

income determined u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act was on account of disallowance of Rs.21,46,158 being late remittance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under the respective Acts. 4. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the First Appellate Authority. It was contended that assessee has paid ... date of filing of return under section 139(1) of the Act. Therefore, it was submitted assessee is entitled to deduction of the employees’ contribution of PF and ESI having regard to the provision to section 43B of the Act. In this context, the assessee relied on 3 Sri G.R.Chandrashekar

Maharashtra Steels Rolling Mills P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-35, Mumbai

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

ITA 5058/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Pramod Parida/Ms. KiranFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 14A

Patil Transports Ltd. (368 ITR 749) by confirming the order passed by the Tribunal that deduction claimed by the assessee on account of employees contribution to PF & ESIC well before the due date of filing return of income is allowable deduction. Following the binding precedent (supra

Allwyn Joseph Sequeira, Mumbai vs. CPC Income Tax Dept., Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in above terms

ITA 2049/MUM/2021[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM I.T.A. No

Alert Care & Construction Services Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Assessing Officer, WD9(1) (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in above terms

ITA 1601/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM I.T.A. No

Muppidathy Sivan Thevar, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1639/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc).

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. It is not in dispute that assessee had remitted the employees’ contribution of PF & ESI with much before the due date of filing of return u/s.139(1) of the Act, though the same has been remitted belatedly beyond ... Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd., reported in 368 ITR 749 had held that employees contribution to PF & ESI if remitted within the due date prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act for filing the income tax returns, would be allowed as deduction u/s.43B

Muppidathy Sivan Thevar, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1638/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Returns U/S.139(1) Of The Act, Could Be Subject Matter Of Adjustment U/S.143(1)(A) Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre (Cpc).

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. It is not in dispute that assessee had remitted the employees’ contribution of PF & ESI with much before the due date of filing of return u/s.139(1) of the Act, though the same has been remitted belatedly beyond ... Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd., reported in 368 ITR 749 had held that employees contribution to PF & ESI if remitted within the due date prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act for filing the income tax returns, would be allowed as deduction u/s.43B

Radhakrishna Devanna Nayak, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Mumbai

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

ITA 1613/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleradhakrishna Devanna Vs. Nfac, New Delhi Nayak, 249, Matrupriti, Hingwala Lane, Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai-400077. Pan/Gir No. : Aaapn4093Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri R.P. Veena.Dr Date Of Hearing 23.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 25.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Cit(A)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Veena.DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 44A

learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in upholding addition' made to the income in respect of Radhakrishna Devanna Nayak., Mumbai. Employer and Employees contribution to PF at Rs.6,55,743/- & and ESIC at Rs.1,48,955/-. 2. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances

M/S. Aquasns Fashions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 586/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Sri.Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the I.T.Act amounting to Rs.18,74,999 on account of belated payment of Employees’ contribution to PF and ESI. 3. There was a delay of 60 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a condonation ... Court in the case of Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (supra)¸ had held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI provided that the payments were made prior to the due date of filing of the return of income

M/S. Jsw Cement Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl /CIT/Dy/ACIT/Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, subject to the observations made/ directions given above, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 241/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Om Prakash Kant

Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 43B

confirming the action of AO who disallowed/added back a sum of Rs. 1,10,62,263/- on account of delayed deposit of employees contribution to PF and ESI under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( hereinafter referred

Dy CIT Central Circle-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Sheth Creators P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2012/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, Cts No. 345A/1 To Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), M/S Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19Th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air India Building, Vs. Plaza, 12Th Floor, Sant Dyaneshwar Nariman Point, Marg, Kala-Nagar, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), 101-A & 1202, 1St & 12Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Hallamark Business Plaza, Near Vs. Nariman Point, Gurunanak Hospital, Sant Mumbai-400021. Dyaneshwar Marg, Kalanagar

without appreciating the fact without appreciating the fact that the appellant has deposited the employees' that the appellant has deposited the employees' contribution to PF contribution to PF & ESIC before filing of income tax return due as per Section 139(1) & ESIC before filing of income tax return ... Extrusion Ltd. 319 ITR 306 has held Supreme Court in case of Alom Extrusion Ltd. 319 ITR 306 has held that if the employees contribution to PF & ESIC is paid before the that if the employees contribution to PF & ESIC is paid before the that if the employees contribution

Sheth Creators P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Central Circle-4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1858/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, Cts No. 345A/1 To Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), M/S Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19Th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air India Building, Vs. Plaza, 12Th Floor, Sant Dyaneshwar Nariman Point, Marg, Kala-Nagar, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), 101-A & 1202, 1St & 12Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Hallamark Business Plaza, Near Vs. Nariman Point, Gurunanak Hospital, Sant Mumbai-400021. Dyaneshwar Marg, Kalanagar

without appreciating the fact without appreciating the fact that the appellant has deposited the employees' that the appellant has deposited the employees' contribution to PF contribution to PF & ESIC before filing of income tax return due as per Section 139(1) & ESIC before filing of income tax return ... Extrusion Ltd. 319 ITR 306 has held Supreme Court in case of Alom Extrusion Ltd. 319 ITR 306 has held that if the employees contribution to PF & ESIC is paid before the that if the employees contribution to PF & ESIC is paid before the that if the employees contribution

Sheth Creators Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Cent. Cir-4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1857/MUM/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, Cts No. 345A/1 To Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), M/S Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19Th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air India Building, Vs. Plaza, 12Th Floor, Sant Dyaneshwar Nariman Point, Marg, Kala-Nagar, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), 101-A & 1202, 1St & 12Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Hallamark Business Plaza, Near Vs. Nariman Point, Gurunanak Hospital, Sant Mumbai-400021. Dyaneshwar Marg, Kalanagar

without appreciating the fact without appreciating the fact that the appellant has deposited the employees' that the appellant has deposited the employees' contribution to PF contribution to PF & ESIC before filing of income tax return due as per Section 139(1) & ESIC before filing of income tax return ... Extrusion Ltd. 319 ITR 306 has held Supreme Court in case of Alom Extrusion Ltd. 319 ITR 306 has held that if the employees contribution to PF & ESIC is paid before the that if the employees contribution to PF & ESIC is paid before the that if the employees contribution

Sheth Creators Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3696/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, Cts No. 345A/1 To Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), M/S Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19Th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air India Building, Vs. Plaza, 12Th Floor, Sant Dyaneshwar Nariman Point, Marg, Kala-Nagar, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), 101-A & 1202, 1St & 12Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Hallamark Business Plaza, Near Vs. Nariman Point, Gurunanak Hospital, Sant Mumbai-400021. Dyaneshwar Marg, Kalanagar

without appreciating the fact without appreciating the fact that the appellant has deposited the employees' that the appellant has deposited the employees' contribution to PF contribution to PF & ESIC before filing of income tax return due as per Section 139(1) & ESIC before filing of income tax return ... Extrusion Ltd. 319 ITR 306 has held Supreme Court in case of Alom Extrusion Ltd. 319 ITR 306 has held that if the employees contribution to PF & ESIC is paid before the that if the employees contribution to PF & ESIC is paid before the that if the employees contribution

Sheth Creators Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Central Circle 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2620/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), Upper Basement, Site Office, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Vasant Oasis, Cts No. 345A/1 To Vs. Nariman Point, 3, 345A 5, Makwana Road, Mumbai-400021. Andheri East, Mumbai-400059. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), M/S Sheth Creators Private Limited, Room No. 1918, 19Th Floor, 1203 & 1204 Hallmark Business Air India Building, Vs. Plaza, 12Th Floor, Sant Dyaneshwar Nariman Point, Marg, Kala-Nagar, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aapcs 2976 M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sheth Creators Private Limited, Dy. Cit, Central Circle-4(2), 101-A & 1202, 1St & 12Th Floor, 18Th Floor, Air India Building, Hallamark Business Plaza, Near Vs. Nariman Point, Gurunanak Hospital, Sant Mumbai-400021. Dyaneshwar Marg, Kalanagar

without appreciating the fact without appreciating the fact that the appellant has deposited the employees' that the appellant has deposited the employees' contribution to PF contribution to PF & ESIC before filing of income tax return due as per Section 139(1) & ESIC before filing of income tax return ... Extrusion Ltd. 319 ITR 306 has held Supreme Court in case of Alom Extrusion Ltd. 319 ITR 306 has held that if the employees contribution to PF & ESIC is paid before the that if the employees contribution to PF & ESIC is paid before the that if the employees contribution

The Malad Sahakari Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the present appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 61/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Ms. Tejasvi PatilFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is not in dispute that Appellant had deposited the employees‟ contribution of PF before the due date of filing of Return under Section 139(1) of the Act, though the same were ITA. No. 61/Mum/2022 Assessment Year ... Hyderabad - Trib.) held that the aforesaid amendments are applicable from Assessment Year 2021-2022. Further, the adjustments/additions in respect of employees contribution to PF fell outside the scope of Section 143(1)(a)(iv) of the Act. Section 143(1)(a)(iv) provides for adjustment in the return of income

Bellur Hiriyaniah Sridhar Murthy, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 544/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: None
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 30Section 32Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 41Section 43B

544/Bang/2022 were processed u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act. In the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the CPC disallowed the employees' contribution to PF and ESI to the tune of Rs.1,76,700/- and Rs.7,53,367/-. The reason for making the disallowance was that the assessee ... remit the employees' contribution to PF and ESI within the due date specified under the respective Acts. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), it was submitted that the assessee remitted the employees contribution to PF and ESI before the due date