ACIT, CIR-32, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI UTPAL KUMAR GUHA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 639/KOL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 October 2017AY 2010-20112 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) allowed the deduction, noting that the payments were made within the due date of filing the return of income. The Tribunal is considering whether Section 36(1)(va) or Section 43B of the Income-tax Act applies to employees' contribution to PF & ESI.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction for PF and ESI payments amounting to Rs. 74,64,086/- as employees' contribution under Section 43B. The AO disallowed this deduction as the payments were not made within the due dates specified in the respective PF/ESI Acts.

What were the issues?

The primary issue is whether the deduction for employees' contribution to PF & ESI, paid after the due date under the respective Acts but before the due date for filing the return, is allowable under Section 36(1)(va) or Section 43B of the Income-tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH: KOLKATA

Hearing: 25.09.2017Pronounced: 11.10.2017

Date of Hearing 25.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement 11.10.2017 For the Appellant Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT For the Respondent Shri S. K. Saha, FCA ORDER Per Shri Aby. T. Varkey, JM:

This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-9, Kolkata dated 05.02.2015 for AY 2010-11 2. The sole issue in this appeal of revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A) allowing deduction in respect of PF & ESI payments without considering the provisions stipulated in section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). For this, revenue has raised following three grounds: “2. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.74,64,086/- made by the AO on account of employees contribution to PF&ESI not paid before the due date as per the respective Acts.

3. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that employers contribution and employees contribution to PF/ESI are treated differently under the I.T. Act.

4.

That, the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that employees contribution to PF/ESI is covered by section 36(1)(va) and not by section 43B of the I.T.Act.”

3.

We have heard rival submissions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee claimed deduction of PF and ESI payments amounting to Rs.74,64,086/- being employees’ contribution u/s 43B of the Act but the AO disallowed by noting that these payments were not made within the due dates as mentioned in the respective PF/ESI Acts. Before CIT(A) assessee has given dates of remittance of the payments in issue and after taking note of the due date of the employees’ contribution to PF & ESI. The CIT(A) noted that these payments are within the due date of filing of return of

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 →