Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 10]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad

Dhall Enterprises & Engineers Pvt. ... vs The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 21 May, 2018

       IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                     AHMEDABAD "C" BENCH

     (BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT
MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER)

                         ITA. No: 2529/AHD/2016
                        (Assessment Year: 2013-14)


     Dhall    Enterprises   & V/S The Dy. C.I.T. Circle-
     Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Nr.      1(1)(2), Ahmedabad
     G.D. High School, Saijpur
     Bogha,       Ahmedabad-
     382345
     (Appellant)                   (Respondent)


                           PAN: AAACD5351J


       Appellant by        : Shri M.K. Patel, AR
       Respondent by       : Shri T. Sankar, Sr. D.R.

                                 (आदे श)/ORDER

Date of hearing              : 11 -05-2018
Date of Pronouncement        : 21 -05-2018


PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1. This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Ahmedabad dated 24.08.2016 pertaining to A.Y. 2013-14 and following grounds have been taken:.

2 ITA No. 2529/Ahd/2016

. A.Y. 2013-14

1. That on facts and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 3,81,252/- made u/s. 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act.

2. Facts of the case are that on verification of audit report filed during the course of assessment proceedings, the auditor has reported the employees PF/ESIC contribution are paid by the assessee late, the details of which are as under:

         Sr.   Month            Nature      of Amount      Due Date       Date         of
         No                     Payment                                   payment

         1     October-2012     PF             240630      20/11/2012     21/11/2012

         1     April-2012       ESIC           17194       21/05/2012     25/05/2012

         2     May-2012         ESIC           18266       21/06/2012     23/06/2012

         3     August-2012      ESIC           32357       21/09/2012     26/09/2012

         4     September-2012 ESIC             19323       21/10/2012     22/10/2012

         5     October-2012     ESIC           18039       21/11/2012     22/11/2012

         6     November-2012 ESIC              17749       21/12/2012     22/12/2012

         7     January -201 3   ESIC           17694       21/02/2013     28/02/2013

               TOTAL                           381252



ii) As such, vide Point No. 8 of order sheet entry dated 07/07/2015, the assessee was required to explain as to why the amount of Rs. 3,81,252/- should not be treated as income u/s. 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax. Act and made addition of Rs. 3,81,252/-.

3. Against the said order, assessee preferred first statutory appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but to no avail.

3 ITA No. 2529/Ahd/2016

. A.Y. 2013-14

4. We have gone through the relevant record in the impugned order. This case is squarely covered against the appellant by the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 366 ITR 170 wherein it is held as under:

"Section 43B, read with section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business disallowance - Certain deductions to be allowed on actual payment (Employees contribution)
- Whether where an employer has not credited sum received by it as employees' contribution to employees' account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in Explanation to section 36(1)(va), assessee shall not be entitled to deduction of such amount though he deposits same before due date prescribed under section 43B i.e., prior to filing of return under section 139(1) -Held, yes - Assessee State transport corporation collected a sum being provident fund contribution from its employees - However, it had deposited lesser sum in provident fund account - Assessing Officer disallowed same under section 43B -However, Commissioner (Appeals) deleted disallowance on ground that employees contribution was deposited before filing return - Whether since assessee had not deposited said contribution in respective fund account on date as prescribed in Explanation to section 36(1)(va), disallowance made by Assessing Officer was just and proper - Held, yes [Para 8] [In favour of revenue]"

5. Respectfully following the above said decision, we dismiss the appeal of the appellant and in our considered opinion, ld. CIT(A) has passed detailed and reasoned order on the basis of Jurisdictional High Court judgment.

6. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed.


             Order pronounced in Open Court on                       21- 05- 2018


                Sd/-                                                                    Sd/-
  (WASEEM AHMED)                                                         (MAHAVIR PRASAD)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER True Copy                                                JUDICIAL MEMBER
Ahmedabad: Dated 21/05/2018
Rajesh

Copy of the Order forwarded to:-
                                  4   ITA No. 2529/Ahd/2016
.                                    A.Y. 2013-14
1.   The Appellant.
2.   The Respondent.
3.   The CIT (Appeals) -
4.   The CIT concerned.
5.   The DR., ITAT, Ahmedabad.
6.   Guard File.
                                             By ORDER




                                     Deputy/Asstt.Registrar
                                       ITAT,Ahmedabad