Vivek Krishnan Nair v. The Asstt.Commissioner of Income
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Vivek Krishnan Nair. Vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax-20(3). .... Mr. Atul K.Jasani for the Appellant. Smt. Padma Divakar for the Respondent. ..... CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD AND ...Respondent. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. January 18, 2010. P.C. : The appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:
(a) Whether the Tribunal erred in upholding the disallowance in respect of Employer’s Provident Fund of Rs.27,18,185/- and ESIC contributions of Rs.17,51,516/- by invoking the provisions of Section 43B of the Act? -(b) Whether the Tribunal ought to have held that amendment to the proviso to Section 43B brought in by the Finance Act, 2003 should have retrospective effect or in the least should apply to assessments made after the amendment?
Counsel appearing on behalf of the Assessee and Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue are agreed in stating before the 2 Court that the issues, which arise in the appeal, are covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd., (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC), in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. In the circumstances, the questions of law are answered in terms of the law laid down in Alom Extrusions (supra). The appeal shall accordingly stand allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ( Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, J.) ( J.P.Devadhar, J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.