Section 43B of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.37

Section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 37 (Certain deductions allowed on actual payment basis only) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 37 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 43B is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 of the 7,161 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 43B

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.

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.

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.

Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT
82 ITR 363 · 1971 · Supreme Court
654
citing judgments

Tax liability for an item of income or expenditure is determined solely by the provisions of the Income-tax Act. Entries in an assessee's books of account are not conclusive and do not govern the taxability or deductibility of an item, as the legal rights and obligations under the Act prevail.

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. 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).

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.

Judgments on Section 43B

Ksb Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax CPC, Bangaluru

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1313/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2020-21 M/S. Ksb Limited The Assistant Director Of 601 Tower 1, Income Tax, Cpc Runawal R Square, Vs. Bengaluru, Lbs Road, Karnataka- 560500. Mulund (W.)- 400080. Pan: Aaack5918J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Tiwari A/W. Shri Mihir Chitaliya, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das- Cit D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13 . 06 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26 . 06 . 2024 O R D E R Per : Ratnesh Nandan Sahay: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Appellant Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act [The ‘Act’ In Short] Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2023-24/1060135975(1) Dated 25/01/2024 For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Following Grounds Of Appeal Have Been Raised By The Appellant: “Based On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ksb Limited (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Appellant") Has Preferred An Appeal Before Your

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari a/w. Shri Mihir Chitaliya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das- CIT D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234CSection 250Section 35DSection 43B

Ajit Kumar Singh, Patna vs. DCIT/Ac, Circle-4, Patna

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 72/PAT/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 72/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Ajit Kumar Singh Dc/Ac, Circle-4, Patna Geeta Mansion, Gujral Path Vs Nalapar, P.O. Keshrinagar Rajivnagar Patna - 800024 [Pan : Algps9902G] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somil Agarwal, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, Jcit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/05/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 05/08/2021, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Sole Issue Involved In This Appeal Is Regarding The Disallowance U/S 36(1)(Va) Of The Act On Account Of Delayed Payment Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf & Esi Of Rs.1,80,45,483/-, Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer As Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A). 3. We Have Heard Rival Contentions & Perused The Material Placed Before Us. The Sole Issue Involved In This Appeal Is Relating To The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,80,45,483/- Made By The Assessing Officer/Cpc U/S 36(1)(Va) Of The Act, On Account Of Delay In Deposit Of Employees’ Contribution To Pf & Esi. It Remains An Admitted Fact

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, JCIT, D/R
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Electronet Equipments Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1), Pune

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

ITA 886/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.886/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Electronet Equipments Pvt. V The Dcit, Ltd., S Circle-1(1), Pune. R.H.No.10, Konark Angan, Bibewadi, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aabce2486N Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sarvesh Khandelwal – Ar Revenue By Shri Rajesh Gawali – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 20/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Act Dated 29.02.2024 For The A.Y.2021-22 Emanating From The Order U/Sec.143(1) Of The Act Dated 24.08.2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On Facts & Circumstances Prevailing In The Case & As Per The Provisions Of The Act It Be Held That The Appellate Order Passed By The Cit Appeals, Addl/Jcit(A), Jodhpur Is Perverse, Without Considering The Additional Ground Raised By The Assessee Company & Without Understanding The Facts Prevailing In The Case & Electronet Equipments Private Limited [A]

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 43

Shriram Dadaji Matte, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year

ITA 180/NAG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri R.K. GaneriwalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 14A

Shriram Dadaji Matte, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year

ITA 179/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri R.K. GaneriwalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 14A

Supreme & Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes as directed above

ITA 613/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.613/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Supreme & Co. Pvt. Ltd…………………………………...………....Appellant 53, Justice Chandra Madhav Road, West Bengal – 700020. [Pan: Aacca7232K] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata….................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ramesh Kr. Varma, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 18, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 24, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 02.02.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That The Ld. Cit(Appeal) Erred In Making Disallowance Of Rs.85,23,450/- U/S 36(1)(Va) In Respect Of Delayed Deposits Of Pf. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(Appeal) Ought Not To Have Made Any Disallowance In Respect Of Delayed Deposit Of Pf The Same Having Been Deposited Before The Due Date Of Furnishing Of The Return Of Income. 3. For That The Disallowance Of Rs.85,23,450/- U/S 36(1)(Va) In Respect Of Delayed Deposit Of Pf Was Wrong & Uncalled For. 4. Cit(A) Has Upheld The Disallowance Of A.O.”

Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Samar Biri Factory, Siliguri vs. A.O., Assessment Unit, Bengaluru

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

ITA 582/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 582/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Samar Biri Factory Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit Aurobindopally Vs Siliguri - 734006 [Pan : Aaofs7941N] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sujit Basu & Rajib Mukherjee, Advocate Revenue By : Shri G. Ajay Robin Singh, Jcit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 19/02/2024, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Various Grounds Of Appeal But The Main Contention Of The Assessee Is That On Account Of The Death Of The Key Person Of The Assessee Firm, No One Could Appear Before The Ld. Assessing Officer And, Thereafter When The Appeal Was Filed Before The Ld. Cit(A), The Same Was Dismissed On Account Of Delay In Filing The Appeal. It Was Prayed That Since High Pitched Assessment Has Been Made In The Case Of Assessee By The Ld. Assessing Officer & Assessee Had No Opportunity To Furnish The Details, The Issues On Merits May Be Restored To The File Of The Ld. Assessing Officer For De Novo Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri Sujit Basu & Rajib Mukherjee, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Ajay Robin Singh, JCIT, Sr. D/R
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 69C

M/S. Rpl Projects Limited, Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T., CPC, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 62/KOL/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jun 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 62/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Rpl Projects Limited Asstt. Director Of Income Tax, 24, Mangalam Building Vs Cpc, Bangalore 301, Hemant Basu Sarani Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaecr3350D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Bonnie Debbarma, Jcit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11/06/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -21, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 25/11/2021, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For Assessment Year 2018- 19. 2. When The Case Was Called For Hearing, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. No Application For Adjournment Has Been Filed. Under These Circumstances, We Proceed To Adjudicate The Instant Appeal Ex- Parte Qua The Assessee, On The Basis Of Available Records & Hearing The Ld. D/R. 3. We Have Heard The Ld. D/R & Perused The Material Placed Before Us. The Sole Issue Involved In This Appeal Is Relating To The Disallowance Of Rs. 41,76,420/- Made By The Assessing Officer/Cpc

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Bonnie Debbarma, JCIT, Sr. D/R
Section 139(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Mansa Builders and Developers, Bhopal vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5(3), Bhopal

Appeal is allowed

ITA 433/IND/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2016-17 Mansa Builders & Income-Tax Officer, Developers, 5(3), 1, Bhopal C/O Radha Krishna बनाम/ Traders, Vs. Bhanpur Square, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan : Aatfm5948C Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal, Adv. & Shri N.D. Patwa, Adv. Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.06.2024

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 145ASection 43B

National Contracting Company (India), Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Circle-4(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 455/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.455/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-2021 ) National Contracting Company Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of (India) Private Limited, Income Tax, No.32, Palani Centre, Corporate Circle 4(1) Vaidyaraman Street, Chennai. Venkatanarayana Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [Pan: Aaacr 8512M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. G. Baskar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. R. Mukundan, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Mukundan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 37Section 43B

DCIT, Circle, Patiala vs. M/S the British Co. Ed. School, Patiala

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 413/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 36Section 43B

Marda Collections Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 7(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed and further directions as per para 8 are issued to the AO

ITA 71/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri B. K. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 4Section 43B

North India Lpg Cylinders Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 3(1), Kolkata

ITA 249/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.249/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2017-18 North India Lpg Cylinders Ltd.………....................…...……………....Appellant 12 Government Place, East Esplanade, Kolkata – 700069. [Pan: Aadcn8006B] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(1), Kolkata….….……………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Ashish Rastogi, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri B. K. Singh, Jcit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 22, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 21, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 06.12.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Delhi. 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Appellant Company Did Not Get The Notice Served For Hearing Trom The Office Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 11, Delhi. 3. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Delhi, Had Erred In Making Disallowances On Account Of Delayed Payment Of Provident Fund & Employees State Insurance Of Rs. 14,54,713/.

Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Irla Co-Op Hsg Soceity Ltd, Mumbai vs. Ward 25(2)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 4269/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Irla Co-Op Hsg Society Vs. Ito, Ward 25(2)(5) Limited, 191/A, Prime Maharashtra – 400054 Mall Irla, Vile Parle (West) Mumbai – 400056 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaai4878F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Pramod Parida Respondent By : H.M. Bhatt Date Of Hearing 13.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Assessment Order Dated 23.11.2018 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. Disallowance U/S 43B- 61,01,040/- I) The Id. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Statutory Liabilities Without Appreciating That The Same Had Been Paid Before The Due Date Of Filing Of Return U/S 139(1) & Further Erred In Holding That The Appellant, A Co-Op Housing Society (Chs), Is Doing Business Activity, Therefore, As Sec 438 Is Not Applicable On The Face It Being Eligible For The Benefit U/S 80P, The Disallowance Of Rs.61.01.040/- Is Uncalled For & The Same May Be Deleted Ii) Without Prejudice To Above, The Id Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Concept Of Mutuality Does Not Apply To The Appellant Where There Is Close Nexus Of All Its Funds Flow Are Utilized Exclusively For The Benefit Of Its Members, Hence The Disallowance Made May Be Deleted As Consistency Needs To Be Respected. 2. Taxability U/S. 22 Or U/S. 56- Rental Or Hire Charges Rs.8,73,634/-

For Appellant: Pramod ParidaFor Respondent: H.M. Bhatt
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 22Section 24Section 43BSection 56Section 80P

Gaurav International, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 49(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 3315/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3315/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम Gaurav International Acit B-34, Mayapuri Industrial Area, Vs. Circle-49(1), Phase-1, West, New Delhi. Civic Centre, Minto Road, New Delhi. Pan No.Aaafg5920D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

Shreya Enterprises, Mumbai vs. ACIT 27(3), Mumbai

ITA 131/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Suresh D. Gaikwad
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 23Section 37

Ritika Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Vcentral Circle-4, New Delhi

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

ITA 430/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year 2013-14

For Respondent: Ms. Beenu, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 43B

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(2), New Delhi, I.P.Estate vs. Coforge Limited, Kalkaji, South Delhi

ITA 125/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Gs Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Alik Vasant, FCA and Ms. Poonam Ahuja, AdvFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 40A(7)

Sarvodaya Credit Co-Op Society Ltd, Udupi vs. Income-Tax Officer Ward-1 & Tps, Udupi

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

ITA 745/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmedr Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Sarvodaya Credit Co-Operative Vs. Ito, Society Ltd., Ward – 1 & Tps, Carstreet Barkur, Brahmavara Udupi, Udupi. Udupi – 576 210. Pan : Aaeas 9576 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Ramnathan, Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.06.2024

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Ramnathan, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 144Section 250Section 263Section 40Section 43B

Gangol Sahkari Dugdh Utpadak Sangh Ltd., Meerut vs. ACIT Circle 1(1), Meerut

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 3837/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Anubhav Sharmaita Nos.3836 & 3837/Del/2023 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2019-20 Gangol Sahkari Dugdh Vs. Ito, Ward 1(2), Utpadak Sangh Ltd., Meerut. 282-Boundary Road, Civil Line, Meerut (Up) Pin:250001 Pan : Aaaag0147K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 43B