JAIPRAKASH CHOUDHARY,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

36(1)(va) of the Act cannot be disallowed u/s 143(1) of the Act (more specifically under sub-clause (d) to 143(1) of the Act). Secondly, the counsel argued that the issue at the time when the disallowance was made, issue was debatable and accordingly could not be the subject matter of disallowance under section

THE MEHSANA URBAN CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE , MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowance of alleged delayed deposit of employees contribution to ESI/PF in terms of the provisions of section 36(1)(va

THE MEHSANA URBAN CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE , MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowance of alleged delayed deposit of employees contribution to ESI/PF in terms of the provisions of section 36(1)(va

THE MEHSANA URBAN CO. OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, MEHSANA CIRCLE , MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITANo

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowance of alleged delayed deposit of employees contribution to ESI/PF in terms of the provisions of section 36(1)(va

THE ANUP ENGINEERING LTD.(MERGED WITH ANVESHAH HEAVY ENGI. LTD),AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT CPC, BANGLORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2018-19 The Anup Engineering Ltd. Dcit, Cpc, (Merged With Anveshah Heavy Vs Bangalore. Engineering Ltd.) Nr.66 Kv Power Station Odhav Road, Odhav, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aaqca 0309 R

36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “the Act”) but paid within the due date of filing of the return under section 139(1) of the Act, and that the impugned disallowance

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SANKALP RECREATION PVT. LTD., AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowed these payments under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment

SANKALP RECREATION PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

disallowed these payments under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment

SUPER SEEDS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Number 2 of the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Of The Final Hearing Of Appeal

disallowance u/s. 2(24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) and added a sum of Rs. 91,215/- with the following observations: “From a plain of clause (b) of section

M/S. M M VORA AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CPC , BANGLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Hearing Of The Appeal.”

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act i.e. due dates as prescribed under section 36(1)(va) of the Act and the actual

M/S. CHECKMATE SERVICES PVT. LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ADIT, CPC, BANGALORE PRESENT JURIDICTION THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), , VADODARA

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 69/Ahd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20) िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. Checkmate Adit, Cpc, बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Services Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore Vs. G.F 6-9, Amaan Tower & Suvas Colony, Fatehgunj, Dy.Cit Vadodara, Gujarat, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara 390002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc8465A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri M. R. Sahu, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit. Dr 12/07/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 16/07/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 08.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Had Filed Its Return Of Income For A.Y. 2019-20 On 30.09.2019 Declaring Total

section 36(1)(va), the deduction of the same would not be available to the assessee. 13. So far as merits of the disallowance

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

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

Bench: Dr.Brr Kumarshri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowance under section 36(1)(iv) instead of section 36(1)(va) as per the intimation u/s. 143(1). It is also

MAHENDRA PATEL BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VADODARA

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

sections": [ "153A", "143(3)", "69A", "37(1)", "36(1)(va)", "139", "132", "282A", "127A", "292B", "10(10D)" ], "issues": "1. Validity of assessment orders not digitally signed. 2. Allowability of insurance premium on directors' life policies as keyman insurance. 3. Disallowance

DIVERSIFIED SERVICES,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

disallowance made by the CPC u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act on account of appellant's failure to pay the employee's contribution of PF/ESI of Rs.8,85,284/- within the prescribed due dates as per section 36(1)(va

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA vs. ORIENTAL ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED, PCC NOTIFIED AREA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

36(1)(va) - addition, referencing Late Payment the Supreme Court's of Employee’s decision in Checkmate Contribution Services (P.) Ltd v. CIT, to Provident which clarifies that Fund (PF) employees' contributions must be paid within the due dates specified under the respective Acts . 2 Addition u/s Rs. 1,35,94,166/- The CIT(A) deleted this Revenue

ORIENTAL ENTERPRISE PRIVATE LIMITED,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

36(1)(va) - addition, referencing Late Payment the Supreme Court's of Employee’s decision in Checkmate Contribution Services (P.) Ltd v. CIT, to Provident which clarifies that Fund (PF) employees' contributions must be paid within the due dates specified under the respective Acts . 2 Addition u/s Rs. 1,35,94,166/- The CIT(A) deleted this Revenue

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA vs. ORIENTAL ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,, PCC NOTIFIED AREA

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

36(1)(va) - addition, referencing Late Payment the Supreme Court's of Employee’s decision in Checkmate Contribution Services (P.) Ltd v. CIT, to Provident which clarifies that Fund (PF) employees' contributions must be paid within the due dates specified under the respective Acts . 2 Addition u/s Rs. 1,35,94,166/- The CIT(A) deleted this Revenue

SCHAEFFLER INDIA LTD.(A SUCCESSOR OF LUK INDIA PVT. LTD)),VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1) (EARLIER ACIT, CIRCLE-1, HOSUR), VADODARA

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowance under section 143(1)(a) was valid in view of Supreme Court's decision in case of Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. (supra) and the assessee will not be entitled to deduction of belated payment of ESI and PF of employees' share of contribution as per provisions of section 36(1)(va

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. SCHAEFFLER INDIA LTD.( ERSTWHILE LUK INDIA PVT. LTD)), VADODARA

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

disallowance under section 143(1)(a) was valid in view of Supreme Court's decision in case of Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. (supra) and the assessee will not be entitled to deduction of belated payment of ESI and PF of employees' share of contribution as per provisions of section 36(1)(va