Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 35 (0.34 seconds)
Mithila And Mithila Enterprise, New ... vs Ward- 49(4), New Delhi on 31 March, 2022 cites

Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Aimil Limited on 25 January, 2005

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 8 - Cited by 401 - Full Document

Commr. Of Income Tax-Ii, Gauhati vs Vinay Cement Ltd. on 7 March, 2007

"11. We hav e c arefully considered the ri val submissi ons in the light of material placed before us. In the assessment order ld. Assessi ng Officer has categorically stated that what the amount due was for whic h m onth in respec t of EPF, Family Pension, PF inspection c harges and ESI deposits and what were the due dates for these deposits and on whic h date these deposits were made. The dates of deposits are mentioned between 23rd May, 2001 to 23rd Apri l, 2002. The latest payment is made on 23rd A pril, 2002 and assessee being limited company had filed i ts return on 20th October, 2002 whic h is a date not beyond the due date of filing of the return. Thus, it is clear beyond doubt that all the paym ents which hav e been disallowed were made much earlier to the due date of filing of the return. The disallowance is not made by the Assessing Officer on the ground that there is no proof of maki ng suc h payment but disallowance is m ade only on the ground that these payments have been made beyond the due dates of making these payments under the respectiv e statute. Thus, i t was not an i ssue that the payments were not made by the assessee on the dates which have been stated to be the dates of deposits in the assessm ent order. If suc h i s a factual aspect then according to latest positi on of law clarified by Hon' ble S upreme Court in the c ase of CIT v. Vinay Cement Ltd. that no disallowance could be made if the payments are made before the due date of filing the return of income.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 365 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next