← All Phrases

“Section 2(24)”

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(24)1,946 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 2(24) is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 2(24)

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.

279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises
298 ITR 141 · 2008 · High Court
706
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified in the respective welfare statutes, are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return. This judgment aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions under Section 43B.

(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. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.
306 ITR 392 · 2008 · Supreme Court
577
citing judgments

The "Purpose Test" determines whether an incentive or subsidy is a capital or revenue receipt for income tax purposes. If the incentive's purpose is to enable an assessee to set up a new industry or make investments in capital assets, it is a capital receipt and not taxable.

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).

Judgments citing Section 2(24)

Amar Pratap Steels Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-7(2), Jaipur

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 228/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(iv)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

M/S. Sultanpur Zilla Sahkari Bank Ltd., Sultanpur vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Faizabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 647/LKW/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y.-2015-16 M/S Sultanpur Zilla Sahkari Bank Pr. Cit, Faizabad Ltd., Near Collectorate, Allahabad Vs. Road, Civil Lines, Sultanpur, U.P. Pan:Aanas6008C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. J.L. Yadav, Adv Revenue By: Sh. Mazhar Akram, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Sh. J.L. Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mazhar Akram, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 263

appropriate authority but retained it with itself .As he was of the view that the same should have been treated as income under section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in his opinion, the order of assessment dated 20.12.2017 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest ... section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and rendered the said amount as income liable to be taxed under section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The failure of the ld. Assessing Officer to take note of these entries in the audited 6 A.Y-2015-16

Unnikrishnan, Palakkad vs. ITO, Ward-2, Palakkad

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

ITA 358/COCH/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Sri.Sivadas Chettoor, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Girly Albert, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 14Section 142(1)Section 144Section 4Section 69Section 69A

this appeal. Section 115BBE, it is submitted that, has no legs to stand in view of the combined and harmonious reading of sections 2(24), 4, 5, 14, 56, 68.69, 69A, 69B, 69C etc. along with the scheme of the IT Act 1961. 4 ITA No.358/Coch/2024. Sri.Unnikrishnan Vadakkanthra Ground

Kalikavu Service Co-Operative Bank Limited, Kalikavu vs. ITO, Ward-2, Tirur

Appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 375/COCH/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Sept 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Hussain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R
Section 2(24)(viia)Section 5Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(4)

under the purview of section 80P(4) of the Act and therefore not eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act. As per section 2(24)(viia) of the Act income earned from member by co-op society engaged in banking activity is also included in the definition of income

Kalikavu Service Co-Operative Bank Limited, Kalikavu vs. ITO, Ward-2, Tirur

Appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 374/COCH/2024[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Sept 2024AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Hussain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R
Section 2(24)(viia)Section 5Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(4)

under the purview of section 80P(4) of the Act and therefore not eligible for deduction u/s 80P of the Act. As per section 2(24)(viia) of the Act income earned from member by co-op society engaged in banking activity is also included in the definition of income

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Megha Engineering and Infrastructures Limited, Hyderabad

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

ITA 1499/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Ble & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Hon’Bleassessment Year – 2020-21 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S.Megha Engineering & Infrastructure Ltd. Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaecm7627A

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 14ASection 80I

beyond the due dates specified under respective statue is not allowable as deduction under Section 36(1)(va) read with 43B, read with Section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 17. We find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services ... beyond the due date specified under the respective Act, cannot be allowed as deduction under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) and this fact has been accepted by the Ld.A.R. for the assessee. However, the Ld.A.R. for the assessee referred to the due date for payment

Abbott Healthcare Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, Ground No. 3 with its Sub-Grounds is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2756/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Gagan Goyalabbott Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. 3, Corporate Park, Sion Trombay Road, Mumbai - 400 071 Pan: Aaack3935D ..... Appellant Vs. Acit 2(1) (1) R. No. 561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Marg, Mumbai- 400 020 ..... Respondent & Acit 2(1) (1) R. No. 561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Marg, Mumbai- 400 020 ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Ld. DR
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 43B

specifically inserted by the Finance Act, 1987, with effect from 1-4-1988. Through the same amendment, by section 3(b), section 2(24) - which defines various kinds of "income" - inserted clause (x). This is a significant amendment, because Parliament intended that amounts not earned by the assessee, but received ... separately dealt with in different clauses of section 36(1). All these establish that Parliament, while introducing section 36(1) (va) along with section 2(24) (x), was aware of the distinction between the two types of contributions. There was a statutory classification, under the IT Act, between

Monica Parmanand Mirchandani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 23(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1082/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am

For Appellant: ShriMahavir AtalFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

said amount from its builder, the same will not come under the purview of the income of the assessee within the meaning of section 2(24) of the I. T. Act unless it is a revenue receipt. As it is the settled proposition of law that the hardship compensation

Monica Parmanand Mirchandani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 23(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1081/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am

For Appellant: ShriMahavir AtalFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

said amount from its builder, the same will not come under the purview of the income of the assessee within the meaning of section 2(24) of the I. T. Act unless it is a revenue receipt. As it is the settled proposition of law that the hardship compensation

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Tiruppur vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing P Ltd, Tiruppur, Tamilnadu

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 326/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Victus Dyeings, The Assistant Commissioner Of 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. Tirupur 641 601. Tirupur. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, Income Tax, Circle 1, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. Tirupur. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, The Assistant Commissioner Of 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. Tirupur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 28

MLFPS is different prior to AY 2017-18 and now the claim is to be considered in terms of the provisions under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act and argued that the assistance in the form of “subsidy or grant or cash incentive or duty draw back or waiver ... treated as income with effect from 01.04.2016. MLFPS is also an incentive directly fall under the cash incentive under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. He referred to page 10 of the paper book regarding explanatory note in respect of section 145 of the Act. He submits the said

Gates Wears, Tiruppur vs. DCIT Circle 1, Tiruppur

ITA 1014/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Victus Dyeings, आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Tirupur 641 601. The Assistant Commissioner Of [Pan: Aacfv4420D] Vs. Income Tax, Circle 1, (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Tirupur. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, Income Tax, Circle 1, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Tirupur. Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) San Tex Inc., 2

Section 143(1)Section 28

MLFPS is different prior to AY 2017-18 and now the claim is to be considered in terms of the provisions under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act and argued that the assistance in the form of “subsidy or grant or cash incentive or duty draw back or waiver ... treated as income with effect from 01.04.2016. MLFPS is also an incentive directly fall under the cash incentive under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. He referred to page 10 of the paper book regarding explanatory note in respect of section 145 of the Act. He submits the said

San Tex Inc., Tirupur vs. ACIT Circle 1, Tirupur

ITA 94/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Tirupur 641 602. Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Victus Dyeings, 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Tirupur 641 601. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) 2

Section 28

MLFPS is different prior to AY 2017-18 and now the claim is to be considered in terms of the provisions under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act and argued that the assistance in the form of “subsidy or grant or cash incentive or duty draw back or waiver ... treated as income with effect from 01.04.2016. MLFPS is also an incentive directly fall under the cash incentive under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. He referred to page 10 of the paper book regarding explanatory note in respect of section 145 of the Act. He submits the said

Geena Garments, Tiruppur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Tiruppur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1348/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Victus Dyeings, The Assistant Commissioner Of 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. Tirupur 641 601. Tirupur. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, Income Tax, Circle 1, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. Tirupur. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, The Assistant Commissioner Of 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. Tirupur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 28

MLFPS is different prior to AY 2017-18 and now the claim is to be considered in terms of the provisions under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act and argued that the assistance in the form of “subsidy or grant or cash incentive or duty draw back or waiver ... treated as income with effect from 01.04.2016. MLFPS is also an incentive directly fall under the cash incentive under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. He referred to page 10 of the paper book regarding explanatory note in respect of section 145 of the Act. He submits the said

ACIT, Circle - 1, Tirupur vs. M/S K.M.Knit Wears, Tirupur

ITA 768/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Tirupur 641 602. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Victus Dyeings, Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Tirupur 641 601. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2018-19 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) San Tex Inc., 2

Section 143(1)Section 28

MLFPS is different prior to AY 2017-18 and now the claim is to be considered in terms of the provisions under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act and argued that the assistance in the form of “subsidy or grant or cash incentive or duty draw back or waiver ... treated as income with effect from 01.04.2016. MLFPS is also an incentive directly fall under the cash incentive under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. He referred to page 10 of the paper book regarding explanatory note in respect of section 145 of the Act. He submits the said

Victus Dyeings, Tirupur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Tirupur

ITA 706/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Tirupur 641 602. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Victus Dyeings, 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Tirupur 641 601. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2018-19 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) 2

Section 143(1)Section 28

MLFPS is different prior to AY 2017-18 and now the claim is to be considered in terms of the provisions under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act and argued that the assistance in the form of “subsidy or grant or cash incentive or duty draw back or waiver ... treated as income with effect from 01.04.2016. MLFPS is also an incentive directly fall under the cash incentive under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. He referred to page 10 of the paper book regarding explanatory note in respect of section 145 of the Act. He submits the said

Km Knit Wear, Tirupur vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore

ITA 358/CHNY/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Tirupur 641 602. Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Victus Dyeings, 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Tirupur 641 601. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2018-19 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Income Tax, Circle 1, Tirupur. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) 2

Section 143(1)Section 28

MLFPS is different prior to AY 2017-18 and now the claim is to be considered in terms of the provisions under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act and argued that the assistance in the form of “subsidy or grant or cash incentive or duty draw back or waiver ... treated as income with effect from 01.04.2016. MLFPS is also an incentive directly fall under the cash incentive under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. He referred to page 10 of the paper book regarding explanatory note in respect of section 145 of the Act. He submits the said

ACIT, Circle-1, Tirupur vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., Tirupur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3326/CHNY/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3326/Chny/2019 & 326/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Eastman Exports Global Clothing (P) Ltd., No. 10, 12, 2Nd Street, Kumar Income Tax, Circle 1(1), 121, Adams Buildings, 60 Feet Road, Nagar South, Tirupur 641 603. Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aaccc0952E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.706/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Victus Dyeings, The Assistant Commissioner Of 410, P.N. Road, R.K. Nagar, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. Tirupur 641 601. Tirupur. [Pan: Aacfv4420D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.768/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, Income Tax, Circle 1, 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Vs. Tirupur. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. [Pan: Aacfk3053B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.358/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. K.M. Knit Wear, The Assistant Commissioner Of 14, E.F. Lakshmi Nagar, First Street, Income Tax, Circle 1, Vs. City Garden, Tirupur 641 602. Tirupur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

Section 28

MLFPS is different prior to AY 2017-18 and now the claim is to be considered in terms of the provisions under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act and argued that the assistance in the form of “subsidy or grant or cash incentive or duty draw back or waiver ... treated as income with effect from 01.04.2016. MLFPS is also an incentive directly fall under the cash incentive under section 2(24)(xviii) of the Act. He referred to page 10 of the paper book regarding explanatory note in respect of section 145 of the Act. He submits the said

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Utv Software Communications Pvt Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 2944/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nehaar Ranjan Pandey, D.R
Section 250Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR

Virendra Singh Saini, Haryana vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore, Bengalore

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

ITA 1483/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Pune19 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1483/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.S.Rajpurohit
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

assistance. 4. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to take note of the relevant statutory provision in this regard. Section 2(24) provides that `income’ includes: `(x) any sum received by the assessee from his employees as contributions to any provident fund or superannuation 5 fund or any fund ... assistance. 4. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to take note of the relevant statutory provision in this regard. Section 2(24) provides that `income’ includes: `(x) any sum received by the assessee from his employees as contributions to any provident fund or superannuation 5 fund or any fund

Gandhar Oil Refinery (India) Limited, Mumbai vs. CC 5(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3889/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalgandharoilrefinery(India)Ltd., Acit, Cc-5(1), Vs. 18Th Floor, Dlh Park, Sv Air India Building Road, Goregaon (West), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400062.. Pan/Gir No. Aaacg3996J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 35Section 36(2)

disallowing the deduction claimed amounting to Rs. 17,278/- on account of delay in payment of contribution to ESI by invoking provisions of section 2(24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case