9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1085X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... br>MR. AJAY RASTOGI AND MR. J.K. RANKA For the Appellant : Mr. Nikhil Simlote on behalf of Mr. R B Mathur For the Respondent : Mr. Gunjan Pathak JUDGEMENT Per : J K Ranka, J : These Income Tax Appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act (for short I.T. Act) are directed against the orders dated 30/09/2008, 20/08/2010, 30/09/2008, 30/09/2008 & 30/09/2008 of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ESI and, therefore, the said amount could not be allowed either under Section 36(1)(va) and even under Section 43B of the I.T. Act as it was not paid on or before the due date of the respective Acts. 4. It is the claim of the respondent-assessee that though the amount could not be paid on or before the due date under the respective Act, but the same was deposited on or before the due date of fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t that the entire amount was deposited by the respondent-assessee at least on or before the due date of filing of the returns under Section 139 of the I.T. Act and being a concurrent finding of fact by the respective authorities and in the light of the judgments rendered by this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.177/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
