C/Taxap/828/2018 Order v. M.r. Shah, J
High Court
10 Jul 2018 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
C/Taxap/828/2018 Order v. M.r. Shah, J
Date of order
10 Jul 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In C/Taxap/828/2018 Order v. M.r. Shah, J, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal.
Decision: In view of the binding decision of this Court, no substantial question of law arises, and therefore, all these Tax Appeals deserve to be dismissed and are accordingly 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 GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/TAX APPEAL NO. 828 of 2018With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 829 of 2018With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 830 of 2018
======================================
CHECKMATE FACILITY AND ELECTRONIC SOLUTIONS PVT LTDVersus
DEPUTY COMMISSONER OF INCOME TAX
======================================
Appearance:
MR. HARDIK V VORA(7123) for the APPELLANT(s) No. 1for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
======================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAHandHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 10/07/2018
ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH)
[1.0]As common question arise in the present group of Tax Appeals, all these Tax Appeals are decided and disposed of by this common order.
[2.0]At the outset, it is required to be noted that Tax Appeal Nos.828/2018 & 829/2018 are with respect to the same assessee but different Assessment Years and Tax Appeal No.830/2018 is with respect to another assessee but involving the same issue.
[3.0]Heard Shri Vora, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respective assessee. Having considered the
submissions made by Shri Vora, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respective assessee and considering the order of assessment passed by the learned Assessing Officer confirmed by the learned CIT(A) and confirmed by the learned Tribunal, it appears that the dispute is with respect to Section 2(24)(x) for delay in employee’s contribution to PF and ESI. It is not in dispute that the issue involved in the present Tax Appeal is squarely covered against the assessee in view of the binding decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax II Vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporationreported in[2014] 41 taxmann.com 100 (Gujarat). The aforesaid is not disputed by Shri Vora, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee. In view of the binding decision of this Court, no substantial question of law arises, and therefore, all these Tax Appeals deserve to be dismissed and are accordingly dismissed.
(M.R. SHAH, J.)
(A.Y. KOGJE, J.)
siji
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.