In Leela Lace Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd v. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-8 (2, the High Court (2010) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Whether the Tribunal erred in upholding the disallowance in respect of Provident Fund and ESIC payment of Rs.18,98,592 by applying the provisions of section 43B of the Act?
Decision: In this view of the matter, for the reasons stated therein, the Appeal is allowed with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
SSM
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 623 OF 2010
Leela Lace Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd..... Appellant
VERSUS
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-8 (2).... Respondent
Mr. Nitesh Joshi a/w Mr. A. K. Jasani for Appellant.Mr. Suresh Kumar for Respondent.
CORAM:J. P. DEVDHAR and R. M. SAVANT, J.J.
DATED:DECEMBER 13, 2010.
P.C.:
1.
Heard.
2.Admit on the following substantial question of law:
“A. Whether the Tribunal erred in upholding the disallowance in respect of Provident Fund and ESIC payment of Rs.18,98,592 by applying the provisions of section 43B of the Act?
B. Whether the Tribunal ought to have held that amendment to proviso to section 43B brought tin by the Finance Act, 2003 should have retrospective effect or in the least should apply to assessments made after the amendment? ”
SSM
3.The Counsel for the parties state that the question raised in
this Appeal are covered by the decision of the Apex Court in the case
of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Alom Extrusions Ltd. reported in (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC) in favour of the assessee.
In this view of the matter, for the reasons stated therein,
the Appeal is allowed with no order as to costs.
(R. M. SAVANT, J)
(J. P. DEVDHAR, J)
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.