Case LawHigh Court › M.v.s. Engineering Ltd Through: None v....

M.v.s. Engineering Ltd Through: None v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 24 Apr 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
M.v.s. Engineering Ltd Through: None v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
24 Apr 2017
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In M.v.s. Engineering Ltd Through: None v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2017) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: By an order dated 2[nd] November, 2004, while admitting the appeal, the Court framed the following question of law for consideration: “Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has correctly interpreted the provisions of Section 43B and 2[nd] proviso thereto, to hold that the Assessee had to deposit...

Decision: The appeal is allowed but in the facts and circumstances of the case, with no orders as to costs.

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 DELHI AT NEW DELHI R-9 + ITA 603/2004 M.V.S. ENGINEERING LTD Through: None. ..... Appellant Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Dileep Shivpuri, Senior standing counsel. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR O R D E R24.04.2017 % 1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („Act‟) filed by the Appellant, M.V.S. Engineering Limited, is directed against the impugned order dated 5[th] March, 2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal („ITAT‟) for the Assessment Year („AY”) 1996-97. 2. By an order dated 2[nd] November, 2004, while admitting the appeal, the Court framed the following question of law for consideration: “Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has correctly interpreted the provisions of Section 43B and 2[nd] proviso thereto, to hold that the Assessee had to deposit the employees contribution under the Employees Provident Fund and Misc. Provision Act, 1952 and the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948, each month before the due ITA 603/2004 dates as prescribed under these Welfare Acts to get the benefit of deduction under Section 43B of the income Tax Act, 1961?” 3. It is seen that the aforesaid question stands answered in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue by the decision ofthis Court inCommissioner of Income-tax v. AIMIL Limited (2010) 321 ITR 508 (Del). 4. Accordingly, the impugned order of the ITAT is set aside and the question framed is answered in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. The appeal is allowed but in the facts and circumstances of the case, with no orders as to costs. S.MURALIDHAR, J APRIL 24, 2017 Rm CHANDER SHEKHAR, J ITA 603/2004
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan