The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Vidarbha, Nagpur v. Maharashtra State Seeds Corporation Limited, Akola
High Court
11 Feb 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · testcase
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Vidarbha, Nagpur v. Maharashtra State Seeds Corporation Limited, Akola
Date of order
11 Feb 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Vidarbha, Nagpur v. Maharashtra State Seeds Corporation Limited, Akola, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
itr.4.98
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO.4 OF 1998
(The Commissioner of Income-tax, Vidarbha, Nagpur
vs.
Maharashtra State Seeds Corporation Limited, Akola)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=Office notes, Office Memoranda ofCoram, appearances, Court's orders Court’s or Judge’s Ordersor directions and Registrar’s orders.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Shri S.N. Bhattad, Advocate for the Applicant.
CORAM: B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ANDV.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
th FEBRUARY, 2016.
DATE : 11
Following question has been referred to this Court.
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was justified in law in upholdingthe order of the CIT (A) deleting the additions madeby the Assessing Officer being the amount of ProvidentFund and ESIC contribution amounting toRs.7,93,926/- paid after the “due date” but during thegrace period ?”
The tax effect, if reference is answered in favour ofthe revenue, is of Rs.3,77,115/-.
Thus, following Instruction No.2 of 2005, dated
24/05/2008 and Instruction No.21, dated 10/12/2015, wereturn the reference unanswered.
JUDGE
JUDGE
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.
EaseValue