JYOTI AUTOMOBILE PRIVATE LIMITED,ALWAR vs. DCIT, ALWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1110/JPR/2016Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 March 2017AY 2012-134 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that if PF and ESI contributions are paid after the due date under the respective Acts but before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1), they cannot be disallowed. This is based on the jurisdictional High Court's decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction for PF and ESI contributions. The amounts were deposited late but before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1). The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction.

What were the issues?

Whether late deposit of PF and ESI contributions, before the due date of filing the return, is disallowable under the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 43B,Section 36(1)(va),Section 139(1)

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, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC

Before: SHRI BHAGCHANDvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1110/JP/2016

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@
Hearing: 20/02/2017Pronounced: 09/03/2017

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL;] ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1110/JP/2016 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13

cuke Jyoti Automobile Private Limited, Dy. Commissioner of Vs. C/o- M/s Fortune Cars, A-97, (A Income Tax, to D), Main Road, Neelam Circle-2, Alwar. Chowk, Bhiwadi, Alwar (Raj). LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCJ 8110 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Poonam Roy (DCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 20/02/2017 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 09/03/2017 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 11/11/2016 passed by the ld. CIT(A), Alwar Jaipur for the A.Y. 2012- 13. The only issue involved in this appeal is regarding sustaining the addition of Rs. 2,39,222/- on account of late deposition of contribution of PF and ESI.

ITA 1110/JP/2016_ 2 Jyoti Automobile Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT

2.

At the outset, of hearing, the ld AR of the assessee has

submitted that this issue is already covered by the various decisions of

the Hon’ble Jurisdiction High Court and also the decision of the Hon’ble

ITAT, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur. He placed reliance on the decision of

Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT Vs. State Bank of

Bikaner & Jaipur (2014) 43, taxmann.com 411 (Raj), CIT Vs. Jaipur

Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (2014) 49 taxmann.com 540 (Raj). He also

placed reliance on the decisions of the Hon’ble Jaipur Bench of ITAT in

the case of ACIT Vs. Rajasthan State Cooperative Oil Seed Growers

Federation Ltd. in ITA No. 615/JP/2013 order dated 01/01/2016 and

DCIT Vs. Amit Basu in ITA No. 765/JP/2011 order dated 25/01/2012.

3.

The ld. DR has relied on the orders of the authorities below.

4.

I have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and

perused the material available on the record. The assessee has

deposited the employees contribution of PF at Rs. 1,33,271 and

employees contribution to ESI amounting to Rs. 1,05,951/- before due

date of filing of return U/s 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in

short the Act). This issue is squarely covered by the decisions of the

Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT(A) SBBJ (supra)

wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held as under:-

ITA 1110/JP/2016_ 3 Jyoti Automobile Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT

“22. We have already observed that till this provision was brought in as the due amounts on one pretest or the order were not being deposited by the assessees though substantial benefits had been obtained by them in the shape of the amount having been claimed as a deduction but the said amounts were not deposited. It is pertinent to note that the respective Act such as PF etc. also provides that the amounts can be paid later on subject to payment of interest and other consequences and to get benefit under the Income Tax Act, an assessee ought to have actually deposited the entire amount as also to adduce evidence regarding such deposit on or before the return of income under sub-section (1) of Section 139 of the IT Act.

23.

Thus, we are of the view that where the PF and/or EPF, CPF, GPF etc., if paid after the due date under respective Act but before filing of the return of income under Section 139(1), cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or under Section 36(1)(va) of the IT Act.”

The Coordinate Bench of this ITAT has also followed the decision of

the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court and various decisions relied by

the ld AR of the assessee. In view of these facts and circumstances, I

set aside the order of the authorities below and allow the assessee’s

appeal.

ITA 1110/JP/2016_ 4 Jyoti Automobile Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 09/03/2017.

Sd/- ¼Hkkxpan½ (BHAGCHAND) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 09th March, 2017 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Jyoti Automobile Private Limited, 1. Bhiwadi, Alwar. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The DCIT, Circle-2, Alwar. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए 5. Jaipur xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 1110/JP/2016) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 43B

All 7,161 judgments and leading authorities on Section 43B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →