COTTON BLOSSOM (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,TIRUPUR vs. ITO, CIRCLE-2, TIRUPPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 681/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 June 2023AY 2018-193 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of employee's contribution to PF made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). This was based on the Supreme Court's decision in Check Mate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in hosiery garment manufacturing and export, filed its return of income for AY 2018-19. The AO made an addition for disallowance of employee's contribution to PF under Section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B.

What were the issues?

Whether belated payment of employee's contribution to PF is allowable as a deduction under the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va),Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE & SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE

Hearing: 26.06.2023Pronounced: 26.06.2023

आदेश / O R D E R PER MANJUNATHA.G, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 02.04.2023, and pertains to assessment year 2018-19.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in manufacture and export of hosiery garments and filed its return of income for AY 2018-19, declaring total income of Rs.21,41,610/- on 29.09.2018.

1.

The return of income filed by the assessee has been processed u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act"), and determined total income of Rs.2,37,50,200/- after making addition towards disallowance of employee’s contribution to PF u/s.36(1)(va) of r.w.s.43B of the Act, for Rs.2,16,08,590/-. The assessee challenged the additions made by the AO towards disallowance of employee’s contribution to PF u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act, before the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) for the reasons stated in their appellate order dated 02.04.2023 by following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Check Mate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, reported in [2022] 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC), confirmed the additions made by the AO towards disallowance of employee’s contribution to PF u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.

3.

None appeared for the assessee, we have heard the Ld.DR and considered the materials available on record and we find that the issue involved in the present appeal is covered against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Check Mate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, where it has been held that belated payment of employee’s contribution to PF cannot be allowed as deduction u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act r.w.s.43B of the Act. The ITAT Chennai Benches in the case of Electrical India v. ITO reported in [2023] 147 taxmann.com 470, had considered an identical issue and by following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Check Mate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (supra), had taken a similar view. The Ld.CIT(A) after considering relevant facts has rightly upheld the additions made by the AO towards disallowance of employee’s contribution to PF u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act, and thus, we are inclined to uphold the findings of the Ld.CIT(A), and dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee.

4.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced on the 26th day of June, 2023, in Chennai.

More judgments on Section 36(1)(va)

All 6,054 judgments and leading authorities on Section 36(1)(va) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →