ASIANET SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 716/COCH/2019Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 March 2020AY 2007-083 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the CIT(A) was justified in confirming the disallowance of employees' contribution to PF/ESI. This was based on the jurisdictional High Court's judgments stating such late payments are not eligible for deduction.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals with a delay of 39 days. The appeals concerned the disallowance of employees' contribution to PF/ESI due to late remittance.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of employees' contribution to PF/ESI paid beyond the due date under respective Acts is justified under Section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va)

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, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Chandra Poojari, AM & Shri George George K, JM

Hearing: 02.03.2020Pronounced: 02.03.2020

Heard together (3 matters)

ITA No.716/Coch/2019
ITA No.717/Coch/2019
ITA No.718/Coch/2019

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Per George George K, JM :

1.

These appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against three orders of the CIT(A), all dated 23.08.2019. The relevant assessment years are 2007-2008, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012.

2.

There is a delay of 39 days in filing these appeals. The assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay along with affidavit of the Director, Sri.Vinayak Aggarwal, stating therein the reasons for delayed filing of these appeals.

3.

We have perused the reasons stated in the delay condonation petition. The delay in filing these appeals cannot -718/Coch/2019 2 M/s.Asianet Satellite Communications Ltd. be attributed any latches of the assessee, hence, the delay in filing these appeals are condoned and we proceed to dispose of the same on merits.

4.

Since common issue is raised in the appeals, they were heard together and are being disposed of this consolidated order.

5.

The solitary issue raised in these appeals is whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of employees’ contribution to PF / ESI u/s 36(1)(va) of the I.T.Act on the ground that the above amounts have been remitted beyond the due date prescribed under the respective Acts.

6.

At the very outset, we noticed that the issue raised in these appeals are covered against the assessee by the judgments of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Merchem Limited [(2015) 378 ITR 443 (Ker.)], and Popular Vehicles & Services Private Limited v. CIT [(2018) 406 ITR 150 (Ker.)], wherein it has been clearly said that the employees’ contribution to PF and ESI paid beyond the due date prescribed under the respective Acts could not be eligible for deduction u/s 36(1)(va) of the I.T.Act. In view of the judgments of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court cited supra, we hold that the CIT(A) is justified in confirming the A.O.’s orders, wherein there was disallowance of employees’ contribution to PF / ESI u/s 36(1)(va) of the I.T.Act on the ground that the above amounts were remitted beyond the due date prescribed under the respective Acts. It is ordered accordingly. -718/Coch/2019 3 M/s.Asianet Satellite Communications Ltd.

7.

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed.

Order pronounced on this 02nd day of March, 2020.

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 →