2020 (4) TMI 232

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gh Dhaddha For the Appellant(s) : Shri Prateek Kedawat For the Respondent(s) : None JUDGMENT This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 urging the following 5 substantial questions of law: i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ITAT was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 20,00,000/- made on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d in law the ITAT is justified in upholding the deletion of disallowance of contribution to Energy Conservation Fund of Rs. 10000000/- as made by Assessing Officer ignoring the fact that contribution towards fund is diversion of income and not allowable u/s.37(1) of the Income Tax Act. v) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law Hon'ble ITAT was justified in de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gards to the question nos.2 and 3, they are common and identically worded and relates to contribution towards provident fund. It is not in dispute that this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur-(2014) 363 ITR 70 (Raj.) decided on 6.1.2014 binds and covers the dispute against the revenue. However, the learned counsel for the revenue informs that the Special ....