TRACK MASTERS,FARIDABAD vs. ITO FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3766/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 December 2024AY 2022-23Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed for statistical purposes

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to reframe the computation to ensure that no double addition is made for ESI/PF and Labour Welfare Funds contribution. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, implying a need for verification of the double addition claim.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order confirming additions totalling Rs. 1,36,480/- for employee contribution to PF and Rs. 6,306/- for Labour Welfare Fund. The assessee contended that these amounts were already included in the income computation, thus constituting an impermissible double addition by the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions made for employee contribution to PF and Labour Welfare Funds constituted a double addition, having already been accounted for in the income computation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 36(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Ms. Romika Bhatia, CA
For Respondent: Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 24/12/2024Pronounced: 24/12/2024

O R D E R

1.

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2022-23, arises against the order of CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dated 21.06.2024 in case No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1065915281(1), in proceedings u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

The assessee has raised the following sole substantive ground:- “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred as CIT(A)) grossly erred in confirming the addition amounting to Rs. 1,36,480/- of Employee Contribution of PF u/s 36(1) and Rs. 6306/- of Labour Welfare fund which is already added in computation of Income and such addition u/s 36 is double made by the ld AO which is uncalled for, based on surmises and conjectures and bad in law.”

4.

Learned counsel raises her sole substantive contention that the impugned disallowance/ addition of the assessee’s ESI/ PF and Labour Welfare Funds contribution has made twice in it’s hands.

5.

Faced with the situation, I deem it appropriate to direct the Assessing Officer to frame his computation after ensuring that there is no such double addition made in the assessee’s hand. Ordered accordingly.

6.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24/12/2024.

More judgments on Section 36(1)

All 49 judgments and leading authorities on Section 36(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →