RANKAS TEXFAB PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE, WARD 3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 483/AHD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 November 2019AY 2014-153 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 held that the appeal was not maintainable due to the delay and lack of condonation. Furthermore, following the jurisdictional High Court's decision, the assessee was not entitled to deduction for delayed deposit of employee's contribution to PF/ESIC.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of two days and without a condonation application. The appeal concerned the addition made by the assessing officer for the delayed payment of employee's contribution to provident fund and ESIC.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal is maintainable due to delay. Whether the assessee is entitled to deduction for delayed payment of employee's contribution to provident fund and ESIC.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va),Section 2(24)(x),Section 43(b),Section 139(1),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH

Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr. D.R

PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-

This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2014-15, arises from order of the CIT(A)-9, Ahmedabad dated 29-11-2017, in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”.

2.

The solitary ground of appeal of the assessee is filed against the decision of ld. CIT(A) in sustaining the addition made by the assessing officer towards delay in payment of employee’s contribution of provident

I.T.A No. 483/Ahd/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 Page No 2 fund and ESIC in view of provision u/s. 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) in government account to the amount of Rs. 2,35,277/-. It is noticed that appeal of the assessee was time barred by two days and assessee has not filed any application for condonation of delay in filing the instant appeal, therefore, this appeal is not maintainable. On merit also, it is noticed that the Hon’ble Jurisdictional 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 employee’s contribution to employee’s account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in explanation to section 36(1)(va), the assessee is not entitled to deduction on such amount though he deposited the said sum before the due date prescribed u/s. 43(b) i.e. prior to filing of return u/s. 139(1) of the I.T. act. In view of the above facts and finding, the assessee has not deposited the employee’s contribution towards ESIC/PF before the due date as prescribed in explanation to section 36(1)(va), therefore, addition of Rs. 2,35,277/- was rightly confirmed by the ld. CIT(A).

3.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 15 -11-2019 (RAJPAL YADAV) (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 15/11/2019

I.T.A No. 483/Ahd/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 Page No 3 आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:-

1.

Assessee

2.

Revenue

3.

Concerned CIT

4.

CIT (A)

5.

DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad

6.

Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद

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 →