Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Unpaid Service Tax Liability Deletion Upheld by ITAT Ahmedabad</h1> <h3>ITO, Ward-3 (3) (11) Ahmedabad Versus Shri Sanjay Rampayare Prajapati</h3> The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad upheld the deletion of an addition of Rs. 2,34,04,061 related to unpaid service tax liability under section 43B of ... Addition u/s 43B - unpaid service tax liability - HELD THAT:- Section 43B provides that if any sum is payable by an assessee by way of tax, duty, cess or fees by whatever name called under any law for the time being in force, then such amounts shall be allowed to the assessee irrespective of the previous year in which the liability to pay such sum incurred by the assessee, according to the accounting method regularly employed by him, only in computing the income in the year in which such sum is actually paid by him. In other words, if these statutory levies were required to be claimed by the assessee, then the deduction of such amount could be claimed in the year in which they were actually paid. In the present case, the assessee has not paid service tax liability. Thus, it cannot claim deduction. The assessee has not claimed the deduction in its account. Therefore, nothing was to be disallowed by the AO. By this exercise, the AO has made double additions; viz (i) assessee himself has not claimed the deduction, and (ii) the AO has added back this amount. CIT(A) has rightly relied upon the decision of CIT Vs. Noble & Hewitt (I) P Ltd. [2007 (9) TMI 238 - DELHI HIGH COURT] and deleted the addition. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:- Appeal against deletion of addition of unpaid service tax liability under section 43B of the Income Tax Act.Analysis:The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad revolves around the Revenue's challenge against the deletion of an addition of Rs. 2,34,04,061 pertaining to unpaid service tax liability under section 43B of the Income Tax Act. The case involves the assessment year 2013-14 and centers on the contention that the ld.CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by deleting the said addition.The assessee, an individual deriving income from construction business, filed a return of income declaring total income at Rs. 44,26,155. During scrutiny assessment, it was discovered that the assessee had unpaid service tax liabilities of Rs. 1,27,22,684 and Rs. 1,07,81,377 as per the certified audit report. The ld.AO issued a show cause notice questioning the disallowance of this unpaid service tax liability under section 43B. Subsequently, the AO added back the amount, resulting in the total addition of Rs. 2,34,04,061.In response to the addition, the assessee appealed before the ld.CIT(A), arguing that the unpaid service tax liability was not claimed as a deduction in the profit & loss account. The ld.CIT(A) considered the appellant's explanation, noting that the amount was not debited in the P&L account and hence cannot be disallowed. The ld.CIT(A) referred to the Delhi High Court judgment in CIT Vs. Noble & Hewitt, emphasizing that under the mercantile system of accounting, disallowing deductions not claimed does not apply.During the Tribunal proceedings, the ld.DR supported the AO's order, while the assessee's counsel relied on the ld.CIT(A)'s decision. The Tribunal analyzed Section 43B, emphasizing that if statutory levies were required to be claimed by the assessee, the deduction could be claimed in the year of actual payment. Since the assessee did not pay the service tax liability and did not claim it as a deduction, the AO's disallowance was unwarranted. The Tribunal upheld the ld.CIT(A)'s decision based on the Delhi High Court precedent and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.In conclusion, the Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal and dismissed it, upholding the deletion of the addition related to the unpaid service tax liability. The order was pronounced on 27th February 2020 at Ahmedabad by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found