TAX TECH INDIA PVT.LTD.,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DCIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1770/AHD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 October 2019AY 2015-163 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 decision of the CIT(A), relying on the Gujarat High Court's ruling that delayed deposit of employee contributions to PF/ESI leads to disallowance of deduction.

What were the facts?

The assessee made delayed payments of employees' contribution towards Provident Fund and ESI. The Assessing Officer disallowed these amounts, and the CIT(A) upheld the disallowance.

What were the issues?

Whether delayed payment of employees' contribution to Provident Fund and ESI is eligible for deduction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va),Section 2(24)(x)

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, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD&SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 01/10/2019

PER AMARJIT SINGH - AM:

1.

The appeal filed by the Assessee for A.Y. 2015-16, arise from order of the CIT(A) – Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad dated 08.06.2018, in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”.

2.

The assessee has filed this appeal against the order of Ld. CIT(A) Gandhinagar in confirming the addition made by the AO on disallowance u/s. 36(1)(va) r.w.s 2(24)(x) of the Act of Rs. 4,04,947/- in respect of delay in making payment of employees’ contribution toward Provident Fund.

3.

The fact in brief is that assessee has filed return of income of Rs. 66,81,230/- and assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act was finalized on 29.09.2017. During the course Tech India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT) A.Y. 2015-16 2 of assessment the AO noticed that assessee has made payment of Rs. 4,04,947/- towards employees’ contribution to the Provident Fund and Rs. 25,096/- towards employees’ contribution to ESI payment after the due date as prescribed in the relevant Act. Consequently the AO has disallowed employees’ contribution to Provident Fund and ESI aggregating to Rs. 4,30,043/- and added to the total income of the assessee.

4.

The assessee has filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee after placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 41 taxmann.com 100 (Guj.).

5.

We have heard the rival contention and perused the material on record. The assessee has not deposited the contribution received from the employees under Provident Fund and ESI within the due date as prescribed in the Provident Fund Act and ESI Act. We consider that the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 265 CTR 64 has held that when the employer has not credited the sum received by it as employees’ contribution to employees account in the relevant fund on or before the due date prescribed in Explanation to Sec. 36(i)(va) the assessee shall not be entitled to deduction. In view of the above facts and judicial findings we uphold the decision of Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 01/10/2019

Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (AMARJIT SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 01/10/2019 TANMAY TRUE COPY आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. राज�व / Revenue 2. आवेदक / Assessee 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4.आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A)

Tech India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT) A.Y. 2015-16 3

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 →