M/S. ORISSA PISCICULTURE CORPORATION LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 126/CTK/2017Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 August 2017AY 2011-124 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 employee's contributions to EPF and ESI are deposited before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1), no disallowance is warranted. The disallowance made by the lower authorities was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited employee's contributions to EPF and ESI after the due date prescribed by the respective Acts but before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1). The Assessing Officer disallowed this deduction, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether employee's contributions to EPF and ESI, deposited after the statutory due date but before the return filing due date, are allowable as a deduction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 43B,Section 2(24)(x),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, CUTTACK

Before: SHRI N.S SAINI

For Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-

1, Bhubaneswar, dated 18.11.2016, for the assessment year 2011-12.

2.

The sole issued involved in this appeal is that the CIT(A) erred in

confirming the order of the Assessing officer disallowing deduction of

employee’s share of EPF and ESI amounting to Rs.13,27,148/- on the

ground that same was not deposited to the PF and ESI authorities within

the due date prescribed under the respective Act.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer found that

during the year under consideration, employee’s contributions to EPF and

ESI amounting to Rs.13,27,148/- were not paid to the respective

2 ITA No. 126/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year :20 11- 12

authorities within the due date as prescribed under the Act but were

deposited later on as under:

EPF (Account No 134368) Code -OR2655 MONTH EMPLOYEES' SHARE DATE OF DEPOSIT ' April 2010 93326 06.07.2010 May2010 90130 21.07.2010 June 2010 94067 19.08.2010 July 2010 99656 06.09.2010 August2010 86176 22.09.2010 September 2010 90829 25.10.2010 Jan2011 90690 22.02.2011 Total 644874

Code -OR3020 MONTH EMPLOYEES' SHARE DATE OF DEPOSIT ' April 2010 93115 06.07.2010 May2010 87500 21.07.2010 June 2010 87653 19.08.2010 July 2010 91076 06.09.2010 August2010 86388 22.09.2010 September 2010 102571 25.10.2010 January 2011 98744 22.02.2011 Total 647647

ESI Contribution St. MONTH EMPLOYEES' SHARE DATE OF DEPOSIT Mo 1. April 2010 3782 29.06.2010 2. May2010 3661 22.07.2010 3 June 2010 3608 17.08.2010 4 July &August2010 8085 29.09.2010 5 September 2010 3292 29.10.2010 6 October 2010 3230 26.11.2010 7 Nov 2010 3406 23.12.2010 8 Jan2011 3177 28.02.2011 9 Feb2011 2986 31.03.2011 Total 35,227

3 ITA No. 126/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year :20 11- 12

4.

Therefore, he added Rs.13,27,148/- to the income of the assessee

under section 43B r.w.s 2(24)(x) of the Act.

5.

On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer.

6.

Before me, ld A.R. of the assessee argued that employee’s

contribution to PF and ESI was allowable deduction to the assessee if the

same was deposited within the due date of filing the return of income

u/s.139(1) of the Act. He submitted that it will be observed from the

assessment order that the payments are made by the assessee before

due date of filing the return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act and,

therefore, the deduction should be allowed.

7.

Ld D.R. supported the orders of lower authorities.

8.

I have heard rival submissions, perused the orders of lower

authorities and materials available on record. In the instant case, it is not

in dispute that the employees’ contributions to PF and ESI were deposited

by the assessee before due date of filing the return of income u/s.139(1)

of the Act. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. AIMIL Limited [2010]

321 ITR 508 (DEL) has held that the employees’ contribution towards EPF

and ESI etc. deposited after the due date but before the time allowed for

filing the return u/s.139(1) will not call for any disallowance

u/s.36(1)(va). Therefore, I set aside the orders of lower authorities and

delete the disallowance of employees contribution to PF and ESI of

Rs.13,27,148/-- and allow this ground of appeal of the assessee.

4 ITA No. 126/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year :20 11- 12

9.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 04/08/2017. Sd/- (N.S Saini) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Cuttack; Dated 04/08/2017 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The appellant : Orissa Pisciculture Corporation Ltd., Plot No.D, Nayapali, Bhubaneswar 2. The Respondent. ITO, Ward 2(1), Bhubaneswar. 3. The CIT(A) -1, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-1, Bhubaenswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack BY ORDER, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack

More judgments on Section 43B

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →