Section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.29, 30, 31, 32

Section 36(1)(va) falls under section 36 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 29 (Deductions related to employee welfare), section 30 (Deduction on certain premium), section 31 (Deduction for bad debt and provision for bad and doubtful debt) and section 32 (Other deductions) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 29 of the 2025 ActRead section 30 of the 2025 ActRead section 31 of the 2025 ActRead section 32 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 36(1)(va) is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 of the 6,054 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 36(1)(va)

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.

CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.
368 ITR 749 · 2014 · High Court
609
citing judgments

Deduction for employees' contributions to PF and ESIC is allowable under Section 43B if paid before the due date for filing the return under Section 139(1); similarly, delayed deposits of employers' contributions to ESIC and PF are also allowable.

CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur
43 Taxmann.com 411 · 2014 · High Court
524
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund, ESI, and other welfare funds, if deposited by the due date for furnishing the return of income under Section 139(1), are allowable as a deduction and cannot be disallowed under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) or Section 43B, even if deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective welfare Acts.

Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
366 ITR 408 · 2014 · High Court
519
citing judgments

An employer's delayed remittance of employees' contributions to provident fund (PF) or Employees' State Insurance (ESI) is deductible if the payment is made before the due date for filing the income tax return under section 139(1), applying the provisions of section 43B and notwithstanding section 36(1)(va).

CIT v. Bharat Hotels Ltd.
410 ITR 417 · 2019 · High Court
486
citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI, if paid beyond the due date prescribed by the respective welfare fund statutes, are not allowed as a deduction under the Income Tax Act.

CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd.
350 ITR 327 · 2013 · High Court
425
citing judgments

Deduction for employee contributions to EPF/ESI is allowable under section 43B if paid before the due date for filing the return of income under section 139(1), irrespective of the due dates under the respective welfare fund statutes.

Judgments on Section 36(1)(va)

M/S. Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6274/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: M/s. Sonali Godbole, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. D/R
Section 36(1)(va)Section 41

Sukiba Management Services Private Limited, Nashik Maharashtra vs. ACIT Circle 1 Nashik, Nashik Maharashtra

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

ITA 1790/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Department byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 10Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 438

Axis Carriers and Logistics Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, 14(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5846/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Omkareshwar Chidara, Am Axis Carriers & Logistics Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Income 803, B Kukreja Palace, Vallabh Baug Tax, 14(1)(1) Lane, Ghatkopar East, Mumbai – Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, 400075. Mumbai – 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aadca9585A (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Rakesh Milwani Respondent By : Shri. Ram Krishn Kedia (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.01.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. Considering The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, It Is Submitted That Once An Order Is Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter, For The Sake Of Brevity, Referred To As "The Act'), The Intimation Of Processing Of Return Of Income U/S 143(1) Of The Act Ceases To Be In Force & Cannot Be Acted Upon Having Merged With Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act & Therefore Additions Made While Processing Return Of Income Cease To Exist Once Order Is Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act & The Additions Made To The Income U/S 143(1) Of The Act & Demands Raised Thereon Ought To Be Deleted. Axis Carriers & Logistics Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri. Rakesh MilwaniFor Respondent: Shri. Ram Krishn Kedia (Sr. DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Amjad Ahmadbhai Sheikh, Nagpur vs. DCIT/ACIT-Circle-3, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 565/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Laxman AndaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)

Shiv Vegpro Private Limited, Kota vs. PCIT-Udaipur, Udaipur

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

ITA 1014/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jan 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, (Adv.) &For Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, (CIT-DR)
Section 147Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Diebold Nixdorf India Private Limited (Formerly Known As Diebold Systems Private Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT 9(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6136/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(ea)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)

Diebold Nixdorf India Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT 4(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6135/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(ea)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle.1(3), Ahmedabad vs. M/S.Aaryavart Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITSSA 70/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kambleit(Ss)A No. 70/Ahd/2021 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Aaryavart Vs. Income-Tax, Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-1(3), 17-A, First Floor, Pariseema Ahmedabad Complex, C.G. Road, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-9 [Pan : Aadca 4844 Q] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, Ar Respondent By: Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22.01.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad (Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short) Dated 18.03.2021 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee-Company Is Engaged In Executing Government Contracts Obtained From Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd For Construction Of Canals, Laying Of Irrigation Pipelines Within Gujarat State, Building Of Railway Bridges At Chhota-Udaipur, Dabhoi, Gujarat. The Assessee-Company Is Also Engaged In Trading Of Building Materials Like Tmt Bars, Cement, Pipes, Grit-Kapchi Etc & Investment In Immovable Properties. The Assessee Filed Return Of Income U/S 139(1) Of It(Ss)A No. 70/Ahd/2021 Acit Vs. Aaryavart Infrastructure Pvt Ltd Asst. Year :– 2017-18 - 2–

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 250

M/S Varsha Construction, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5/RPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 5/Rpr/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2019-20) M/S Varsha Construction, V The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Second Floor-25, 26, Millenium Plaza, S Tax, Circle-1(1), Central Revenue Raipur-492 001, Chhattisgarh Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, C.G.. Pan: Aaefv 8399 M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) . (""थ" / Respondent) . िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2025 : 22.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Mr. Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 44A

Lycos Internet Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1769/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, СА
Section 14ASection 249(4)(a)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)

M/S.Coastal Energen Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. PCIT, (Central), Chennai-1

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1624/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1624 /Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2015-16 M/S. Coastal Energen Private Limited, The Principal Commissioner Of Shri Radhakrishnan Dharmarajan, Income Tax, Central-1, No.31, Krishna, 1St Avenue, 100Ft Road, Chennai. Ashok Nagar, Chennai-600 083 [Pan: Aadcc0886G] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Shrenik Chordia For Mr.B.Ramakrishnan,C.A प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुिवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.12.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M : This Appeal Is Filed Against The Order Bearing Din & Order No.Itba/Rev/F/Rev5/2023-1063739847(1) Dated 31.03.2024 Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax [Herein After “Pcit, For The Assessment Years 2015-16. Through The Aforesaid Appeal The Assesse Has Challenged Order U/S 263 Dated 31.03.2024 Passed By Pcit, Chennai. 2.0 The Only Issue Arising From The Six Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Is Regarding Exercise Of Revisionary Power U/S 263 By The Ld.Pcit, Chennai Vide His Order Dated 31.03.2024 Qua Order U/S 143(3)

For Appellant: Shri Shrenik Chordia for Mr.B.Ramakrishnan,C.AFor Respondent: Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 13(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Olive Bar & Kitchen Private Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 6255/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt. Renu Jauhriolive Bar & Kitchen Pvt. V/S. Acit, Circle-13(1)(1), बनाम Ltd. Mumbai 14 Union Park, Palli Hill Maharashtra-400020 Tourist Hotel Pvt. Ltd, Palli Hill Road, Khar West, Mumbai-400052 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaco5346G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Dcit, Circle-13(1)(2), V/S. Olive Bar & Kitchen Pvt. Mumbai बनाम Ltd. R. No. 218, Aayakar 14 Union Park, Palli Hill Bhavan, M K Road, Tourist Hotel Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai, Palli Hill Road, Khar West, Maharashtra-400020 Mumbai-400052 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaco5346G Appellant/अपीलार्थी Respondent/प्रतिवादी ..

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh RajoraFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pmnani
Section 250Section 35D(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(lit)Section 37(1)

Olive Bar and Kitchen Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 13(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5924/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Smt. Renu Jauhriolive Bar & Kitchen Pvt. V/S. Acit, Circle-13(1)(1), बनाम Ltd. Mumbai 14 Union Park, Palli Hill Maharashtra-400020 Tourist Hotel Pvt. Ltd, Palli Hill Road, Khar West, Mumbai-400052 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaco5346G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Dcit, Circle-13(1)(2), V/S. Olive Bar & Kitchen Pvt. Mumbai बनाम Ltd. R. No. 218, Aayakar 14 Union Park, Palli Hill Bhavan, M K Road, Tourist Hotel Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai, Palli Hill Road, Khar West, Maharashtra-400020 Mumbai-400052 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaco5346G Appellant/अपीलार्थी Respondent/प्रतिवादी ..

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh RajoraFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pmnani
Section 250Section 35D(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(lit)Section 37(1)

Smt. Usha Sharma, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 480/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Eagle Hunter Solutions Vs Commissioner Of Income Limited Tax (Appeals)-25 61C, Kalu Sarai, Sarvapriya New Delhi Vihar, New Delhi-110016 Pan: Aabce0565E Appellant Respondent

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 270A(2)Section 270A(2)(a)Section 36(1)

Binay Rambahal Singh, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(6), Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1099/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Surat21 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1099/Srt/2024 (Ay 2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Binay Rambahal Singh Income Tax Officer, 112, Sankaip Row House Society Ward-2(3)(6), Surat, Aayakar बनाम Ugat Canal Road, Jahangira Bag. Bhavan, Majura Gate, Vs Near Prabhudarshan Society, Surat-395 001 Surat-394 130 [Pan : Azyps 7939 M] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 139Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

M/S Little Kanhaya Knitwears, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, CC-3, Ludhiana

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

ITA 724/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 724/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018019 M/S Little Kanhya Vs. The Dcit बनाम Central Circle-3, Knitwears, Ludhiana Ram Gali, Madhpuri-1, Ludhiana 141008 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaefl0415E अपीलाथ"/ Assessee ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Jcit Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 30.12.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 142Section 143(2)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 36Section 40

Vardhman Textiles Ltd., Ludhiana vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Ludhiana

ITA 80/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: This Tribunal. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Order Bearing No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2023-

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT-Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Canpac Trends Pvt. Ltd., Bavla vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 271/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.271/Ahd/2021 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2017-18 Canpac Trends Pvt.Ltd. Plot No.338, Chiyada Village : Chiyada B/H. Jerala Gidc Ahmedabad – 382 220 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabcv 9858 M बनाम / V/S. The Acit Circle-1(1)(2) Ahmedabad (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By : -None- Revenue By : Dr. Sanjay Lal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: : 16/01/2025 20/01/2025 आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre - Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)"], Dated 25/08/2021, Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 1(1)(2), Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao"], Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act"], For The Assessment Year 2017-18.

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Dr. Sanjay Lal, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 56Section 56(2)(viib)

Kinetic Advertising India Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6051/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjeekinetic Advertising India Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Private Limited, Tax – Circle 16(1), Mumbai 7Th & 8Th Floor, Wing-A, The Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Orb-Sahar, Village Marol, Road, Mumbai-400 020 Andheri East, Mumbai, Sahar P & T Colony S.O., Andheri-400 099 Pan: Aabcp1311M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi (SR. DR.)
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

Shree Shivam Attires Pvt. Ltd., Durg vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Bhilai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed, in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 111/RPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 111/Rpr/2021 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri Yash Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)