GUNNEBO INDIA EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 1(1), MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI “SMC” BENCH : MUMBAI
Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARYAssessment Year : 2016-17
PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M :
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld.
Addl./JCIT(A)-8, Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], dated 28-02-2025, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17. 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 54 days in filing the appeal as pointed out by the Registry. After hearing both the parties and taking into consideration the affidavit placed on record seeking condonation of delay, we find that there was reasonable cause for the delay
2
in filing the present appeal and hence, the delay is hereby condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication.
During the course of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessment in this case was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act, wherein the AO has determined the assessed income at Rs. 10,51,424/-, after denying the claim of exemption u/s.10(25) of the Act and which has since been sustained by the Ld.CIT(A).
In this regard, our reference was drawn to the application filed by the assessee in accordance with the sub-rule (51) of Rule 77 before the competent authority and it was submitted that the assessee has since received the necessary approval in respect of its Provident Fund Scheme from the ld. PCIT, Thane -1 vide order dt. 30-04-2024 and which is effective from 30-09-1950 and, therefore, the assessee is eligible for exemption u/s. 10(25) of the Act. It was submitted that though the said approval was granted on 30-04-2024, however, the same could not be brought to the notice of the Ld.CIT(A) before passing of the impugned order dated 28-02-2025. It was submitted that since the said approval has been granted, the matter is no more in dispute and, therefore, the assessee be allowed the necessary exemption u/s. 10(25) of the Act.
Per contra, the Ld.DR has been heard, who has relied on the order of the authorities below.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. We find that the assessee‟s Provident Fund Scheme has been granted the necessary approval by the Ld.PCIT, Thane-I, vide order dt. 30-04-2024 and the same has been made effective from 3 30-09-1950, which covers the impugned assessment year and a copy thereof has been placed on record. In the light of the same, the assessee deserves the necessary exemption u/s 10(25) of the Act and, therefore, the addition so made by the AO is hereby directed to be deleted.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 31-07-2025. [RAHUL CHAUDHARY] [VIKRAM SINGH YADAV]
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai,
Dated: 31-07-2025
TNMM
Copy to :
1)
The Appellant
2)
The Respondent
3)
The CIT concerned
4)
The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai
5)
Guard file
By Order
Dy./Asst.