BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

111 results for “disallowance”+ Section 2(24)(x)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,371Mumbai2,023Bangalore848Kolkata718Chennai548Ahmedabad510Jaipur470Pune269Chandigarh256Hyderabad238Indore194Raipur162Surat143Cochin113Nagpur111Visakhapatnam111Amritsar97Cuttack95Lucknow84Agra81Guwahati80Jodhpur67Rajkot58Karnataka52Calcutta40Ranchi26Jabalpur20Allahabad18SC18Telangana17Patna15Varanasi10Panaji6Dehradun5Rajasthan5Kerala5Himachal Pradesh3Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Punjab & Haryana1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 43B181Section 36(1)(va)118Section 143(1)105Section 139(1)75Deduction70Disallowance63Addition to Income61Section 143(3)58Section 36

RANAR AGROCHEM LIMITED,PARAWADA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 288/VIZ/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.288/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2014-15) Ranar Agrochem Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaccp0372M (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri M. Madhusudan, Ca (Hybrid) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Jenardhanan V, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 31/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 15/05/2024, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “A.O.”) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”) Dated 30/12/2016 For A.Y.

For Appellant: Shri M. Madhusudan, CAFor Respondent: Sri Jenardhanan V, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

Showing 1–20 of 111 · Page 1 of 6

46
Section 2(24)(x)34
Section 234
Rectification u/s 1548
Section 68

Section 2(24)(x) is found to be valid and proper in fact and law. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the disallowance

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GUNTUBOLU UMA SAI PRASAD, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 227/VIZ/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri I. Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act, leading to disallowance of this sum to the extent

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. GUNTUBOLU UMA SAI PRASAD, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 226/VIZ/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri I. Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act, leading to disallowance of this sum to the extent

GUNTUBOLU UMA SAI PRASAD,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 97/VIZ/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri I. Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)

section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act, leading to disallowance of this sum to the extent

LOHMAN CASTINGS PVT LTD,ANAKAPALLE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ANAKAPALLE

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 263/VIZ/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.262 & 263/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Lohman Castings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer C5 To C7, Nh-5 Ward-1 Industrial Development Area Anakapalle Anakapalle [Pan : Aaacl5905E] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Hemalatha, ARFor Respondent: Shri SPG Mudaliar, DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act, any recovery from employees towards provident fund contribution is deemed to be income of the assessee, if the employer not paid the same to the provident fund account of the employee within due date specified under the provisions of PF Act. It is the contention of the assessee that second proviso

LOHMAN CASTINGS PVT LTD,ANAKAPALLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ANAKAPALLI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 262/VIZ/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.262 & 263/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2019-20) Lohman Castings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer C5 To C7, Nh-5 Ward-1 Industrial Development Area Anakapalle Anakapalle [Pan : Aaacl5905E] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Hemalatha, ARFor Respondent: Shri SPG Mudaliar, DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act, any recovery from employees towards provident fund contribution is deemed to be income of the assessee, if the employer not paid the same to the provident fund account of the employee within due date specified under the provisions of PF Act. It is the contention of the assessee that second proviso

THE ETIKOPPAKA COOP AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 260/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R L Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Balakrishnan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance could be made in view of the provisions of Section 43B as amended by Finance Act, 2003. 6. In the present case, the assessee had remitted the employees contribution beyond the due date for payment, but within the due date for filing the return of income. Hence, following the above said decisions, we find no reason to differ with

MAHATI SOFTWARE PVT LTD.,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 67/VIZ/2016[20011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Sept 2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.67/Viz/2016 & 68/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 & 2012-13) M/S Mahati Software Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.10-27-14A Income Tax Sivam, Kailashmetta Circle-3(1) Waltair Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aadcm9620J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(1)Section 194JSection 40

section 2(24)(x) and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.9,77,039/- u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24

M/S. MAHATI SOFTWARE PVT. LTD.,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 68/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Sept 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.67/Viz/2016 & 68/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 & 2012-13) M/S Mahati Software Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of D.No.10-27-14A Income Tax Sivam, Kailashmetta Circle-3(1) Waltair Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aadcm9620J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal, DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(1)Section 194JSection 40

section 2(24)(x) and accordingly disallowed a sum of Rs.9,77,039/- u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24

OURS YOUTH CLUB,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 22/VIZ/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.22/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Ours Youth Club Vs. Income Tax Officer 1-19-17, Bc Colony Agraharam Ward-1 Vizianagaram Vijayanagaram [Pan : Aaaao2600H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance by applying provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the IT Act. 3. The Ld.CIT

VANI CONSTRUCTIONS,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

The appeal of the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 83/VIZ/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri I.Kama Sastry, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Srinivasa Rao, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)

2(24)(x) of the Act to the income already assessed in the assessment order, while relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble (M/s. Vani Constructions) Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (265 CTR 64) wherein it was held that when the Assessee has not deposited the employees contribution

KLMM HOSPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 227/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.227/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Klmm Hospital Private Ltd Vs. Income Tax Officer 29-14-58, Prakasam Road Ward - 1(1) Surya Rao Peta Visakhapatnam Vijayawada [Pan : Aadck4136F] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri PV Madhusudana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri SPG Mudaliar, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance of deduction claimed on account of 4 ITA No.227/Viz/2021, A.Y.2018-19 KLMM Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Visakhapatnam Employees’ contribution to PF & ESI by invoking the amended provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the Act, treating the amended provisions applicability as retrospective. 5. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee admitted the factual positions. The Revenue has not disputed

SANJANA FLEXIPACK PRIVATE LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE CIT(APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 102/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.102/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sanjana Flexipack Private Limited Vs. Income Tax Officer Plot Np-84/3, D-Block Ward 1(1) Auto Nagar Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aatcs1423P] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri PV Madhusudana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri SPG Mudaliar, DR
Section 139(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowance of deduction claimed on account of Employees’ contribution to PF & ESI by invoking the amended provisions of 4 ITA No.102/Viz/2021, A.Y.2018-19 M/s. Sanjana Flexipack Private Ltd., Visakhapatnam section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the Act, treating the amended provisions applicability as retrospective. 5. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee admitted the factual positions. The Revenue

LOHMAN CASTINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,ANAKAPALLE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, ANAKAPALLE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/VIZ/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.140/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Lohman Castings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer C5 To C7, Nh-5 Ward-1 Industrial Development Area Anakapalle Anakapalle [Pan : Aaacl5905E] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri SPG Mudaliar, DR
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 438Section 43B

disallowance of deduction claimed on account of Employees’ contribution to PF & ESI by invoking the amended provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the Act, treating the amended provisions applicability as retrospective. 5. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee admitted the factual positions. The Revenue has not disputed the fact that the payment to employees contribution

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DASARI KASI VISWANADHAM,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 412/VIZ/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleacit, Circle-5(1), Vs. Dasari Kasiviswanadham, Visakhapatnam. Prop. United Surgicals, Sagar Nagar, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Afbpd 9254 P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowed the same on the ground that the assessee has not remitted within the prescribed due date as per the relevant Acts, hence, he treated the same as deemed income of the assessee under section 2(24)(x

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. YONA SMELTERS PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 411/VIZ/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleacit, Circle-5(1), Vs. M/S. Yona Smelters Pvt. Visakhapatnam. Ltd., D.No. 49-36-20, Flat No.B1, Nikhils Residency, Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaacy 3608 D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 6

disallowed the same on the ground that the assessee has not remitted within the prescribed due date as per the relevant Act, hence, he treated the same as deemed income of the assessee under section 2(24)(x

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NEM ENGINEERING PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 458/VIZ/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleacit, Circle-3(1), Vs. M/S. Nem Engineering Visakhapatnam. Projects Private Ltd., D.No. 55-15-6, Housing Board Colony, Krishna College Road, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaccn 6245 K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 6

disallowed the same on the ground that the assessee has not remitted within the prescribed due date as per the relevant Act, hence, he treated the same as deemed income of the assessee under section 2(24)(x

ARINANA DAVID RAJU,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 285/VIZ/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blearinana David Raju, Vs. Acit, Circle-4(1), D.No. 43-14-17, Visakhapatnam. Subbalakshmi Nagar, Dondaparthy, Visakhapatnam Pan No. Aedpa 1853 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.Srinivasa Murthy, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowed the same on the ground that the assessee has not remitted within the prescribed due date as per the relevant Act, hence, he treated the same as deemed income of the assessee under section 2(24)(x

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue as well as C

ITA 405/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleacit, Circle-3(1), Vs. M/S. Eastern Power Visakhapatnam. Distribution Company Of Andhra Pradesh Ltd., P & T Colony, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaace 9876 B (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 104/Viz/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 405/Viz/2018) (Asst. Year : 2013-14) M/S. Eastern Power Vs. Acit, Circle-3(1), Distribution Company Of Visakhapatnam. Andhra Pradesh Ltd., P & T Colony, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaace 9876 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.V.N. Hari – Advocate. Department By : Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowed the same on the ground that the assessee has not remitted within the prescribed due date as per the relevant Act, hence, he treated the same as deemed income of the assessee under section 2(24)(x

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue as well as Cross

ITA 403/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleacit, Circle-3(1), Vs. M/S. Eastern Power Visakhapatnam. Distribution Company Of Andhra Pradesh Ltd., P & T Colony, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaace 9876 B (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.105/Viz/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 403/Viz/2018) (Asst. Year : 2014-15) M/S. Eastern Power Vs. Acit, Circle-3(1), Distribution Company Of Visakhapatnam. Andhra Pradesh Ltd., P & T Colony, Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam. Pan No. Aaace 9876 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Smt. A. Aruna – Advocate. Department By : Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/11/2018. Date Of Pronouncement : 22/11/2018. O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Smt. A. Aruna – AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik – Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

disallowed the same on the ground that the assessee has not remitted within the prescribed due date as per the relevant Act, hence, he treated the same as deemed income of the assessee under section 2(24)(x