Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle I, Patna v. M/S Patna Central School, Vidyapuri, Kankarbagh, P.o. Lohianagar, Patna
High Court
05 Feb 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · patnahcucisdb94
Parties
Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle I, Patna v. M/S Patna Central School, Vidyapuri, Kankarbagh, P.o. Lohianagar, Patna
Date of order
05 Feb 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle I, Patna v. M/S Patna Central School, Vidyapuri, Kankarbagh, P.o. Lohianagar, Patna, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeals are, therefore, dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
MA No.364 of 2005
1. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Patna
2. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle I, Patna
VERSUS
M/s Patna Central School, Vidyapuri, Kankarbagh, P.O. Lohianagar, Patna
MA No.365 of 2005
1. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Patna
2. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle I, Patna VERSUS
M/s Krishna Niketan, 43, Patliputra Colony, Patna
MA No.366 of 2005
1. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Patna
2. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle I, Patna VERSUS M/s Patna Central School, Vidyapuri, Kankarbagh, Patna
MA No.367 of 2005
1. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Patna
2. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle I, Patna VERSUS
M/s Krishna Niketan, 43, Patliputra Colony, Patna
-------
5 5.2.2009
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
perused the impugned order of the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal in all these appeals.
The Tribunal has concurred with the orders of the
Commissioner, Income Tax in these cases who has discussed
the provisions of Section 43B of the Income Tax Act in the light of various judgments of this Court as well as of the Supreme Court to give benefit to the assessee in respect of
payments made by him towards employees provident fund after a delay of one or two days. We find no error in the impugned order. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed.
(Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)
(J.N.Singh, J.)
sk
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.