Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 446 (0.65 seconds)
Documents citing Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Aimil Limited on 25 January, 2005

Guardian India Solutions Pvt. Ltd., ... vs Ward-10 (4), Delhi on 9 March, 2022

3. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in the facts and in law in sustaining the addition/disallowances of Rs. 12,50,929/- as it is against the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High court in the case of PCIT Vs. pro Interactive Service India Pvt. Ltd., ITA no. 983/2018 dated 10.09.2018 and CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508 (Delhi High Court)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sansun Staffing Solutions Pvt Ltd, New ... vs Ito Ward - 22(3), New Delhi on 31 March, 2022

6. Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee's case. The decision relied on by the ld. CIT (Appeals) as has been considered by the Tribunal in this case and following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. (supra) and the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Pro Interactive Service (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and also ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vegetable Products Ltd. 82 ITR 192 (SC) the Tribunal decided the issue in favour of the assessee.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Gurudev Sharma, Delhi vs Dcit, Cpc, Bengalore on 29 April, 2022

The decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Ltd. [supra] is applicable to the assessee's case and this decision has again been followed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court In the case of PC IT vs Pro Interactive Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. decision dated September 10, 2018 in ITA No. 938/2018. Therefore, the decisions of non-jurisdiction High Courts referred to by the Ld. CIT, NFAC cannot be relied upon to hold the issue against the assessee.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - G S Pannu - Full Document

Azamgarh Steel & Power Private Limited, ... vs Cpc , Banglore on 31 May, 2021

But the Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr. CIT vs. Pro Interactive Service (India) Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 983/2018 pronounced on 10.09.2018 wherein the Hon'ble High Court decided the issue in favour of the assessee relying upon the judgment of AIMIL Ltd. (supra). The Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that the legislative intent was/is to ensure that the amount paid is allowed as expenditure only when payment is actually made. We do not think that the legislative intent and objective is to treat belated payment of Employee's Provident Fund (EPD) and Employee's State Insurance Scheme (ESI) as deemed income of the employer under Section 2(24)(x) of the Act. It is settled law that when two judgments are available giving different views then the judgment which is in favour of the assessee shall apply as held in case of Vegetable Products Ltd. 82 ITR 192 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hence, in light of the latest decision in case of Pro Interactive Service (India) Pvt. Ltd., the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. Hence, Ground No. 1 is dismissed."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 8 - Cited by 32 - Full Document

Max Maintenance Limited, New Delhi vs Dcit, Cpc, Bangalore on 28 February, 2022

As on aforesaid 16.10.2019; the aforesaid amendments to Section 36(1)(va) and Section 43B of Income Tax Act had not been enacted; but orders of Hon'ble Delhi High Court (the jurisdictional 27 ITA No.1251/Del/2021 Max Maintenance Limited vs. ITO High Court) in favour of assessee and against Revenue on this issue in aforesaid cases of CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. (supra); CIT vs. Pro Ineractive Service (India) Ltd. (supra) and CIT vs. P.M. Electronics Ltd. (supra) were available. Accordingly, the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,21,50,660/- could not have been added to assessee's income as on 16.10.2019 in the light of these binding precedents of the Hon'ble Delhi Court in favour of the assessee. Therefore, we are of the view that the aforesaid adjustments made by Revenue on 16.10.2019, whereby the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,21,50,660/- were unfair, unjust, and bad in law.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 61 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sahi Warehousing Pvt. Ltd. , Haryana vs Income Tax Officer Ward 22 (1) Delhi , ... on 7 September, 2022

25. We hav e perused the order of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. 321 ITR 508 v ide or der dated 23.12.2009 held that if the employees' contribution is not deposited by the due date prescribed under the relevant Ac ts and is deposited late, the empl oyer not only pays i nterest on delayed payment but can i nc ur penalties also, f or which specific provisions are made in the Provident Fund Act as well as the ESI Act. Therefore, the Act permits the employer to make the deposit with some delays, subject to the aforesaid consequences. I nsofar as the Income- tax Act is c oncerned, the assessee can get the benefit if the actual payment is made before the ret urn is filed, as per the princi ple laid down by the Hon'ble S upreme Court i n the c ase of Vinay Cement Ltd.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shahi Exports Private Limited,Delhi vs Pcit (Central), Delhi - 1, Delhi on 7 March, 2025

7. Now only because a specific query has not been raised by the AO in notice u/s 142(1) of the Act, that cannot lead to an inference that the AO has not applied its mind to the issue at all. Where the ld. AO was bound by the judgement in CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. (supra) and he was supposed to complete the assessment following the same, then there was no necessity for ld. AO to have issued any query on that count.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mithila And Mithila Enterprise, New ... vs Ward- 49(4), New Delhi on 31 March, 2022

8. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. We find force in the submissions of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that while processing the return under Section 143(1) of the Act, no disallowance towards contribution to employees' PF and ESI is warranted as this issue is highly debatable in nature. The case laws relied upon by the ld. Counsel supports the contention of the assessee that disallowance is not warranted as the issue is highly debatable. Even otherwise we find that the issue in appeal is squarely covered by the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. (supra). Ratio of this decision squarely applies to the facts of the assessee's case. The decision relied on by the ld. CIT (Appeals) as has been considered by the Tribunal in this case and following the decision 5 I.T.A.Nos.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 38 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next