2015 (1) TMI 697

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... N, SRI.MAHESH V.MENON FOR THE RESPONDENT : ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX JUDGEMENT The petitioner, who was engaged in the processing of raw cashew nuts, was assessed to tax for the assessment year 2000-2001 under the Income Tax Act. The assessment proceedings were subsequently reopened by the 1st respondent in terms of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. By Ext.P1 order, that was pass .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it is admitted that, in respect of the payments representing employers contribution under the Employees State Insurance Scheme, the deduction claimed by the petitioner has to be allowed. It is pointed out, however, that in respect of the employees contribution under the Employees State Insurance Act, the claim of the petitioner for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Income Tax Act. The eligibility of the petitioner for deduction of the employers contribution is now settled through the retrospective amendment made to Section 43B by the Finance Act, 2003, as clarified by the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Solar Export [(2012) 210 Taxman 520]. Thus taking into account the aforesaid aspect Exts.P1 and P3 are set aside, to the extent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X