← All Phrases

“recognised provident fund”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(38) / Part A of Fourth Schedule / ITR Part A-OI63 judgments

BASHIR JAFAR BHALDAR,SONAI SERVICES 1 SONAI SERVICES, BARAMATI ROAD IND vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD 14(5) PUNE, AAYAKAR SADAN BODHI TOWER SALASBURY PARK GULTEKDI

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

ITA 2919/PUN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2919/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar DoshiFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 288Section 33BSection 44ASection 80J

period of less than two hundred and forty days during the previous year; or (d) an employee who does not participate in the recognised provident fund: Provided that in the case of an assessee who is engaged in the business of manufacturing of apparel or footwear or leather products

DODLA DAIRY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -8(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 466/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Shri Aashik Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. U. Mini Chandran
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 80Section 801BSection 80J

आयकर अपील"य "याया"धकरण म", हैदराबाद ‘‘ए” ब"च, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad “A” Bench

DY..C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S STATE BANK OF MYSORE, BANGALORE

ITA 684/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved & Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray, Spl. Counsel
Section 2Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 41(1)

section 28- (1) to (iii) ** ** ** (iv) any sum paid by the assessee as an employer by way of contribution towards a recognised provident fund or an approved superannuation fund, subject to such limits as may be prescribed for the purpose of recognising the provident fund or approving the superannuation fund ... statutory funds. State Bank of India (erstwhile State Bank of Mysore prior to merger) 16.1 Sums contributed by an employer to have created recognised provident fund, an approved superannuation fund and an approved gratuity fund are deducted in computing his taxable profits. Expenditure actually incurred on the welfare of employees

STATE BANK OF MYSORE,BANGALORE vs. JCIT, BANGALORE

ITA 661/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved & Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray, Spl. Counsel
Section 2Section 250Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 41(1)

section 28- (1) to (iii) ** ** ** (iv) any sum paid by the assessee as an employer by way of contribution towards a recognised provident fund or an approved superannuation fund, subject to such limits as may be prescribed for the purpose of recognising the provident fund or approving the superannuation fund ... statutory funds. State Bank of India (erstwhile State Bank of Mysore prior to merger) 16.1 Sums contributed by an employer to have created recognised provident fund, an approved superannuation fund and an approved gratuity fund are deducted in computing his taxable profits. Expenditure actually incurred on the welfare of employees

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 545/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 544/PUN/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 543/PUN/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1155/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1154/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1153/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA

MANPOWERGROUP SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, DELHI , JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3585/DEL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 80JSection 92CSection 92D

period of less than two hundred and forty days during the previous year; or (d) an employee who does not participate in the recognised provident fund: 34[Provided that in the case of an assessee who is engaged in the business of manufacturing of apparel, the provisions of sub-clause

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INTERLOCKING SURGEONS,SOLAPUR, MAHARASHTRA vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2817/PUN/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay K. Dhivare
Section 154Section 167ASection 167BSection 250

persons employed in such business. The Board have been advised that cases where income received by the trustees on behalf of a recognised provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income-tax Act, the question of their being charged

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INTERLOCKING SURGEONS,SOLAPUR, MAHARASHTRA vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2816/PUN/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay K. Dhivare
Section 154Section 167ASection 167BSection 250

persons employed in such business. The Board have been advised that cases where income received by the trustees on behalf of a recognised provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income-tax Act, the question of their being charged

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INTERLOCKING SURGEONS,SOLAPUR, MAHARASHTRA vs. THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2560/PUN/2024[AAATN9300L]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Feb 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2816, 2817 & 2560/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2014-15 & 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay K. Dhivare
Section 154Section 167ASection 167BSection 250

persons employed in such business. The Board have been advised that cases where income received by the trustees on behalf of a recognised provident fund, approved superannuation fund and approved gratuity fund is governed by section 10(25) of the Income-tax Act, the question of their being charged

MAYURAKSHI GRAMIN BANK EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND, PBGB REGIONAL, ,SURI, BIRBHUM vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 3, SURI, SURI, BIRBHUM

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

ITA 1159/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1159/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Mayurakshi Gramin Bank Employees Provident Fund,………………………………………Appellant Pbgb Regional, Suri Birbhum-731101, West Bengal [Pan:Aabtm2580Q] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax,……...Respondent Circle-3, Suri, Aayakar Bhawan, Lalkuthipara, Suri, Birbhum-731101, W.B. Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsian, Advocate & Ms. Lata Goyal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Subhro Das, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: January 23, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: January 31, 2025 O R D E R

Section 10Section 10(25)Section 10(25)(ii)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 254

fund arising from the sale, exchange or transfer of such securities; (ii)any income received by the trustees on behalf of a recognised provident fund; (iii)any income received by the trustees on behalf of an approved superannuation fund; (iv)any income received by the trustees on behalf ... Bank Employees Provident Fund (xi) Provident fund to which the Provident Funds Act, 1925 (19 of 1925) referred to in sub-clause (i), recognised provident fund referred to in sub-clause (ii), approved superannuation funds referred to in sub-clause (iii), approved gratuity fund referred to in sub-clause

INDIRA GANDHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,SARANGA vs. ITO,EXEMPTION,BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 375/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2015-16 Indira Gandhi Institute Of Indira Gandhi Institute Of Vs. Ito, Ito, Exemption, Exemption, Technology, Technology, Saranga, Saranga, Bhubaneswar. Kamakhya Kamakhya Nagar, Nagar, Dist: Dhenkanal-759146 759146 Pan/Gir No. No.Aaati 5050 J (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Natabar Panda, Adv Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/01/20 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/01/20 025 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 10Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 197A

assessment year 2006-2007; (xi) Provident fund to which the Provident Funds Act, 1925 (19 of 1925) referred to in sub-clause (i), recognised provident fund referred to in sub-clause (ii), approved superannuation funds referred to in sub-clause (iii), approved gratuity fund referred to in sub-clause

TEKNI ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1855/AHD/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumarshri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Adjournment ApplicationFor Respondent: Shri V K Mangla, Sr. DR
Section 14(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

fulfilment of condition specified in relevant clauses" at sub-para (f) under the heading of "Amount of contributions to a recognised provident fund [36(1)(iv)]" Rs. 58,153/- has been disallowed. 3. The A.O. as well as learned CIT(A) has erred on facts while not considering that

PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

ITA 598/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Dec 2024AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: Sh. Siddharth Ranka, AdvFor Respondent: \nSh. Saurav Harsh, Adv.&
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144oSection 14ASection 263Section 69

amounts has been\nshown which are as under:\n14. Compensation to employees\ni\nSalaries and Wages\n15742627\nii\nBonus\n3708410\nvii\nContribution to recognised Provident Fund\n6174439\nix\nContribution to any Other Fund\n3326094\nX\nAny Other Benefit to employee in respect of which an\nexpenditure has been incurred\n122475451

SHIVABASAPPA KARIYAPPANAVAR ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1537/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore13 Dec 2024AY 2017-18
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

advance of salary;\n(vi) the annual accretion to the balance at the credit of an\nemployee participating in a recognised provident fund, to the\nextent to which it is chargeable to tax under Rule 6 of Part `A' of\nthe Fourth Schedule; and\n(vii) the aggregate

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, PATIALA vs. PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED, PATIALA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 659/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Saldi, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

relevant contents thereof read as under: “10.3 Under the existing provisions of the 1961 Act, the contribution made by an employer towards a recognised provident fund, an approved superannuation fund or an approved gratuity fund is allowable as a deduction from business income under clauses (iv) and (v) respectively

Showing 1–20 of 63 · Page 1 of 4