Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.41 seconds)
Sky I T Infratech Private Limited, New ... vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc on 25 May, 2022 cites

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

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 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 Next