DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 4(1), CHENNAI vs. MAURYA HOTELS (MADRAS) PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2995/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 May 2018AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's cross-objection, noting a mistake in the appeal's tax effect. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed both on merit and due to the tax monetary limit.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order allowing the assessee's appeal regarding the delayed remittance of employees' PF/ESI contributions. The assessee also filed a cross-objection.

What were the issues?

Whether the delayed remittance of employees' PF/ESI contributions, made before the due date of filing the return, is deductible. Whether the appeal is maintainable based on the tax effect.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN

For Respondent: Shri. N. Madhavan, Addl. CIT, Shri. P. Anand, CA
Hearing: 01.05.2018Pronounced: 01.05.2018

आदेश/ O R D E R

PER BENCH:

1.

The Revenue filed this appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Chennai in dated 29.07.2017 for assessment year 2014-15 and the assessee filed CO against the same order.

2.

M/s. Maurya Hotels (Madras) Pvt Ltd., the assessee, is engaged in the hotel business. While making the assessment for assessment year 2014-15, the AO found that the assessee has not remitted the employees contribution towards PF/ESI within the due date under the respective statue, but made it well within the due date of filing the return u/s. 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee relied on the decision of various High Courts and tribunal decision. The CIT(A) following the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. Industrial Security and Intelligence Pvt. Ltd., (TCA No. 586/2016) has allowed the assessee’s appeal. Aggrieved, the Revenue filed this appeal in ITA No. 2995/2017.

3.

The assessee filed CO with the following plea:

“(1) There is a mistake in the Ground No.2 taken by the Appellant namely in the amount deleted it is mentioned as Rs.84,38,293 whereas the deletion is only Rs.6,71 243/- and not Rs.84,38,293/-. (2) This, in turn, will reduce the tax effect which will be less than Rs.2 Lakhs. As per Circular No.21/2015 of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the appeal can be filed for the Tribunal in the dispute if the tax effect is above Rs.10 Lakhs. Hence, the appeal has to be summarily dismissed.”

4.

We heard the rival submissions. We find merit in the plea raised by the CO and hence, the CO is allowed. Since, the CIT(A) has applied the decision

:-3-: CO No: 39/Chny/2018 of the Jurisdictional High Court, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed both on merit as well as on the assessee’s plea on the tax monitory limit.

5.

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in is dismissed and assessee’s CO in CO No. 39/2018 is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 01st May, 2018 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →