ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -1, NASHIK vs. SUNSUBA POWERDEAL LTD, NASHIK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 666/PUN/2021Status: HeardITAT Pune01 September 2022AY 2018-193 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee is entitled to claim deduction if the employee's contribution is paid within the due date of filing the return of income. The CIT(A)'s order was found to be justified.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition made by the CPC for delayed payment of employee's contribution to EPF and ESIC. The assessee contended that the payment was made before the due date of filing the return of income.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance for delayed payment of employee's contribution to EPF and ESIC is justified when paid before the due date of filing the return of income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Joshi
For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

आदेश / ORDER

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :

1.

This appeal by the Revenue against the order dated 13-10-2021 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (‘NFAC’) for assessment year 2018-19.

2.

The Revenue raised two grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi justified in deleting the addition of Rs.1,94,18,282/- on account of delayed payment of the employee’s contribution to EPF and ESIC u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. We note that the assessee is a company. The DCIT, CPC, Bangalore vide intimation u/s. 154 of the Act made addition of Rs.1,94,18,282/- on account of disallowance u/s. 36(1)(va) towards delayed payment of employee’s contribution to EPF and ESIC. The assessee contended that the employee’s contribution towards PF has been paid before the due date of filing of return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 but however the CPC, Bangalore Delhi did not accept the submissions of assessee and the CIT(A), NFAC remanded the issue to the file of AO for verification, with a direction that the assessee is entitled for claiming deduction that if the employee’s contribution is paid within due date of filing of return of income. We note that the CIT(A) did not dispute the payment of employee’s contribution by the assessee within due date of filing of return of income and it is evident from the impugned order that the assessee paid the employee’s contribution towards provident fund before the due date of filing of Income Tax Return. Therefore, the order of CIT(A) is justified. Thus, the assessee is entitled for deduction and grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed.

4.

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 01st September, 2022.

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 →