DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., JAIPUR

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 134/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year: 2013-14 cuke Deputy Commissioner of M/s Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Vs. Income Tax, Ltd., Circle-6, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCJ 6373 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Rolee Agarwal(CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (CA) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 03/04/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 04/04/2018 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M.

This is an appeal filed by the revenue emanates from the order of

the ld. CIT(A)-2, Jaipur dated 21/11/2017 for the A.Y. 2013-14, wherein

the revenue has taken following grounds of appeal:

“(i) Whether on the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) is justified in disallowance of Rs. 5,86,97,214/- made by the A.O. for depositing the employees’ contribution of CPF/GPF/ESI beyond the prescribed time limit provided in respective Acts. (ii) Whether on the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that employee’s contribution to PF & ESI

ITA 134/JP/2018_ 2 DCIT Vs. JVVNL

are governed by the provision of Section 43B and not by Section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the IT Act.

against deleting the addition of Rs. 5,86,97,214/- on account of

depositing the PF & ESI beyond the prescribed time limit. The ld. CIT(A)

has granted relief to the assessee by holding as under:

“2.3. I have perused the facts of the case, the assessment order and the submissions of the appellant. Admittedly, contribution to PF & ESI has been paid by the appellant, in all instances, before the due date of filing the return of income U/s 139(1). This fact is therefore, not in dispute. In view of the judgments of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jaipur Vidhyut Vithran Nigam Limited, 265 CTR 62 (Raj), CIT Vs State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (2014) 99 DTR 131 (Raj), and other case laws on this issue, the claim of the appellant is allowable. Accordingly, this disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is, directed to be deleted. This ground is allowed.”

Assessing Officer. On the contrary, the ld AR of the assessee has

reiterated the arguments as made before the ld. CIT(A) and prayed to

allow the appeal.

is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court on

which the ld. CIT(A) has relied to grant relief to the assessee, therefore,

ITA 134/JP/2018_ 3 DCIT Vs. JVVNL we sustain the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue and dismiss the grounds No. (i) and (ii) of this appeal.

vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत