← All Phrases

“Section 139(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 139Section 139(1)7,818 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 139(1) is CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (359 ITR 565), cited in 2,590 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 139(1)

CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory
359 ITR 565 · 2013 · High Court
2,590
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty proceedings are initiated for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. This non-specification vitiates the penalty proceedings.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.
320 ITR 561 · 2010 · Supreme Court
1,673
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer cannot initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act based on a mere change of opinion. Reassessment is permissible only when there is fresh tangible material leading to the belief of income escapement, not merely a review of existing facts.

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. 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.

CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders
349 ITR 336 · 2012 · High Court
956
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can entertain fresh claims or revised computations of income made by an assessee, even if these were not submitted through a revised return of income.

CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows
73 Taxmann.com 241 · 2016 · High Court
791
citing judgments

A penalty notice under section 271(1)(c) read with section 274 of the Income Tax Act is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty is for concealment of income or for furnishing incorrect particulars of income.

Judgments citing Section 139(1)

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

long as the payments towards provident fund dues are made before the due date of filing of the income tax return under section 139(1), even beyond the permissible time limit under the relevant statute under which payment is made, the payments so made are deductible in the computation ... payments made beyond the due date under the relevant statute but before the due date of filing of the income tax return under section 139(1) cannot attract the disallowance for the reason of delay. Once again learned counsel has referred to and relied upon the decisions of the coordinate

Adarsh Chamanlal Kaul, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1952/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyaladarsh Chamanlal Kaul 10Th Floor 2, It Park, Techniplex Ii, Junction Of Veer Savarkar Flyover, Goregaon (West), Mumbai-400062 Pan: Ahrpk7595A ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit, Cpc Bangaluru Pin-560500. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Sunil G. Rohra Respondent By : Sh. Mehul Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 26/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/08/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As (‘Nfac’) Dated 26.08.2021 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. "On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In The Law, Faa Erred In Passing Ex-Parte Order Without Providing A Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard In The Course Of Faceless Hearing To The Appellant Without Appreciating The Facts That Submissions Couldn'T Be Uploaded Due To Non- Functional/ Technical Glitches On The Income Tax Portal Since 1St June 2021 Onwards".

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil G. RohraFor Respondent: Sh. Mehul Jain, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

Ujjivan Small Finance Bank Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 578/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Aug 2022AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Sri.S.Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Bijoy Kumar Panda, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234ASection 234FSection 80J

conditions are satisfied: (i) The return of income for AY 2020-21 has been filed on or before the due date specified under section 139(1) of the Act; (ii) The assessee company has opted for taxation u/s 115BAA of the Act in (e) of “Filing Status” in “Part

DCIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai vs. Jay Ketan Parikh, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1225/MUM/2022[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Bledcit – Central Circle – 1(2) V. Jay Ketan Parikh Room No. 906, 9Th Floor 94-D, Thanee Heights Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe 66, Nepean Sea Road Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai - 400006 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaipp6681J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Department By : Shri Achal Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

HSBC Bank by 4 companies as mentioned elsewhere in this order. In the instant case, the assessee filed the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act on 16.10.2006 whereas the search was conducted under section 132(1) of the Act on 08.08.2011. Thus the time limit

DCIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai vs. Jay Ketan Parikh, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1223/MUM/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Bledcit – Central Circle – 1(2) V. Jay Ketan Parikh Room No. 906, 9Th Floor 94-D, Thanee Heights Pratishtha Bhavan, Old Cgo Annexe 66, Nepean Sea Road Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai - 400006 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaipp6681J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Department By : Shri Vranda U. Matkari

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Vranda U. Matkari
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

HSBC Bank by 4 companies as mentioned elsewhere in this order. In the instant case, the assessee filed the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act on 16.10.2006 whereas the search was conducted under section 132(1) of the Act on 08.08.2011. Thus the time limit

M/S. Otis Elevator Company (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy.Comm of Income Tax, Circle 13(1) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1865/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2022AY 2010-11
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 244ASection 244A(2)

ITA No.: 1865/Mum/2022 Assessment year: 2010-11 Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI ‘H’ BENCH

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

disallowance does not come into play when the payment is made well before the due date of filing the income tax return under section 139(1). Viewed thus also, the impugned adjustment is vitiated in law, and we must delete the same for this short reason as well

Amasebail Vyvasaya Seva Sahakari Sangha Limited, Udupi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 537/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh R. Uppin, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 119Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 148Section 80ASection 80A(5)Section 80P

considered and granted if eligible. 20. Here, questions would arise as to whether belated returns filed beyond the period stipulated under section 139(1) or section 139(4) as well as following sections 142(1) and 148 proceedings could be considered for exemption. If those returns are eligible ... mere ground of belated filing of return by the assessee concerned. A return filed by the assessee beyond the period stipulated under section 139(1) or 139(4) or under section 142(1) or section 148 can also be accepted and acted upon provided further proceedings in relation to such

Salunki Govindrao Sambhaji, Dharwad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 504/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri G. Sathyanarayana, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 10Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(vi)Section 154Section 57

ITA No.504/Bang/2022 Salunki Govindrao Sambhaji, Dharwad IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI

M/S Gokula Education Foundation, Bangalore vs. Additional Director of Income Tax Range-17, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 945/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Padmavathy Sassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dev Ratan Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PADMAVATHY S

Dell India Private Ltd., Bangalore vs. JCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 562/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Karanth, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 92C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Ms. PADMAVATHY S

Omkara Co.Operative Housing Soc. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 19(1) (1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1442/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2022AY 2019-20
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 81

under consideration as 31.8.2019. Since the return of income was filed by the assessee on 19.9.2019, i.e. beyond the due date prescribed under section 139(1), deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80P of the Act was disallowed by CPC and the same was also confirmed by learned ... section 81 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Society Act, 1960. He further submitted that the due date of filing of return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, in respect of the persons whose account are required to be audited under the Income Tax Act or under any other

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “SMC-B”, BANGALORE Before Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member ITA No.586/Bang/2022 : Asst.Year

M/S. Shri Mahishasuramardini Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Limited, Haveri vs. Income Tax Officer, Wrd-1, Haveri

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 566/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Sri.Vishal S Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 234ASection 234BSection 69ASection 80P(2)(a)

considered and granted if eligible. 20. Here, questions would arise as to whether belated returns filed beyond the period stipulated under section 139(1) or section 139(4) as well as following sections 142(1) and 148 proceedings could be 16 ITA No.566/Bang/2022. Sri Mahishasuramanrdini Urban Co-op Cr.So.Ltd. considered ... mere ground of belated filing of return by the assessee concerned. A return filed by the assessee beyond the period stipulated under section 139(1) or 139(4) or under section 142(1) or section 148 can also be accepted and acted upon provided further proceedings in relation to such

Sri B.V. Sreenivasa Reddy, Bellary vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 372/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2012-13 Shri B.V. Sreenivasa Reddy, The Deputy Srinagar Colony, Commissioner Of Near Arunodhaya Income Tax, Hospital, Central Circle – 1[3], Siriguppa Road, Bangalore. Vs. Bellary. Pan: Afbpr9736C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Advocate : Shri Venudhar Godesi, Jcit Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 19-07-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 16-08-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 19/01/2022 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-11, Bangalore For A.Y. 2012-13 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Orders Of The Authorities Below In So Far As Levying Penalty U/S 271[1][C] Of The Act Against The Appellant Are Opposed To Law, Equity, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Order Of Penalty Passed U/S 271[1][C] Of The Act Is Bad In Law As The Notice Issued Under Section 274 Rws 271 Of The Act Is Not Discernable Whether The Penalty Proceedings Are Initiated For Furnishing Of Inaccurate Particulars Of Income Or Concealment Of Income Under The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case.

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, Advocate
Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL

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

hereinafter referred to as the Act) despite the assessee contributing/depositing the same before the due date of filing of return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act. 3.Brief facts of the case is that the CPC while processing the return disallowed/added Rs. 1

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

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 due as per Section 139(1) & ESIC before filing of income tax return due as per Section ... received from employees deposited by provident fund contribution received from employees deposited by assessee before the due date of filing of return under section 139(1) assessee before the due date of filing of return under section 139(1) assessee before the due date of filing of return under section

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

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 due as per Section 139(1) & ESIC before filing of income tax return due as per Section ... received from employees deposited by provident fund contribution received from employees deposited by assessee before the due date of filing of return under section 139(1) assessee before the due date of filing of return under section 139(1) assessee before the due date of filing of return under section

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

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 due as per Section 139(1) & ESIC before filing of income tax return due as per Section ... received from employees deposited by provident fund contribution received from employees deposited by assessee before the due date of filing of return under section 139(1) assessee before the due date of filing of return under section 139(1) assessee before the due date of filing of return under section

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

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 due as per Section 139(1) & ESIC before filing of income tax return due as per Section ... received from employees deposited by provident fund contribution received from employees deposited by assessee before the due date of filing of return under section 139(1) assessee before the due date of filing of return under section 139(1) assessee before the due date of filing of return under section