Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur
Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... vs Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Jaipur on 4 April, 2018
vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR
Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k
BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM
vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 134/JP/2018
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year: 2013-14
Deputy Commissioner of cuke M/s Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam
Income Tax, Vs. Ltd.,
Circle-6, Jaipur. Jaipur.
LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCJ 6373 K
vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent
jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Rolee Agarwal(CIT)
fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)
lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 03/04/2018
mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 04/04/2018
vkns'k@ ORDER
PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the revenue emanates from the order of the ld. CIT(A)-2, Jaipur dated 21/11/2017 for the A.Y. 2013-14, wherein the revenue has taken following grounds of appeal:
"(i) Whether on the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld.
CIT(A) is justified in disallowance of Rs. 5,86,97,214/- made by the A.O. for depositing the employees' contribution of CPF/GPF/ESI beyond the prescribed time limit provided in respective Acts.
(ii) Whether on the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld.
CIT(A) was justified in holding that employee's contribution to PF & ESI 2 ITA 134/JP/2018_ DCIT Vs. JVVNL are governed by the provision of Section 43B and not by Section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the IT Act.
2. Grounds No. (i) and (ii) of the revenue's appeal are interlinked and against deleting the addition of Rs. 5,86,97,214/- on account of depositing the PF & ESI beyond the prescribed time limit. The ld. CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee by holding as under:
"2.3. I have perused the facts of the case, the assessment order and the submissions of the appellant. Admittedly, contribution to PF & ESI has been paid by the appellant, in all instances, before the due date of filing the return of income U/s 139(1). This fact is therefore, not in dispute. In view of the judgments of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jaipur Vidhyut Vithran Nigam Limited, 265 CTR 62 (Raj), CIT Vs State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (2014) 99 DTR 131 (Raj), and other case laws on this issue, the claim of the appellant is allowable. Accordingly, this disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is, directed to be deleted. This ground is allowed."
3. The ld. CIT DR has vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer. On the contrary, the ld AR of the assessee has reiterated the arguments as made before the ld. CIT(A) and prayed to allow the appeal.
4. The Bench have heard both the sides on this issue. Since this issue is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court on which the ld. CIT(A) has relied to grant relief to the assessee, therefore, 3 ITA 134/JP/2018_ DCIT Vs. JVVNL we sustain the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue and dismiss the grounds No. (i) and (ii) of this appeal.
5. In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 04/04/2018.
Sd/- Sd/-
¼fot; iky jko½
jko½ ¼Hkkxpan½
(VIJAY PAL RAO) (BHAGCHAND)
U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member
Tk;iqj@Jaipur
fnukad@Dated:- 04th April, 2018
*Ranjan
vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf'kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- The DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur.
2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- M/s Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Jaipur.
3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT
4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A)
5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur
6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 134/JP/2018) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar