DCIT, CHENNAI vs. ACCEL IT RESOURCES LTD., CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 905/CHNY/2016Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 September 2016AY 2011-124 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that as per the proviso to Section 43B, payments made towards employees' contribution to ESI and Provident Fund are allowable if paid before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1). The CIT(A) had rightly directed the AO to verify the payment dates.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order allowing the assessee's claim for employees' contribution to ESI and Provident Fund. The assessee had not credited these amounts to the respective funds before the due date.

What were the issues?

Whether employees' contribution to ESI and Provident Fund, paid before the due date of filing the return of income, is allowable as a deduction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 43B,Section 139(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

Hearing: 17.08.2016Pronounced: 23.09.2016

आदेश /O R D E R

PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

Both the appeals of the revenue are directed against the respective order of CIT(A) -1, Chennai dated 08.01.2016 and pertains to Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12. Since common issue arises for consideration in both the appeals, we heard the same together and disposing off the same by this common order.

2.

No one appeared for the assessee inspite of service of notice.

Therefore, we heard the learned representative for the department and proceeded to dispose off the appeal on merit. Shri V.Nanda Kumar, the learned representative for the department submitted that the only issue arises for consideration is disallowance of employees’ contribution to ESI and Provident Fund. According to the learned representative for the department, the employees’ contribution has to be credited to the respective funds before the due date provided under the relevant provisions of the Act. In this case, the assessee has not credited the amount within the due date specified under the relevant act. Therefore, the assessing officer disallowed a sum of Rs.29,82,013/- for the assessment year 2010-11 and Rs.20,13,732/- for the assessment year 2011-12. Therefore, the CIT(A) is not justified in allowing the claim of the assessee.

3.

We have considered the submissions of the learned representative of the department and also perused the material available on record. The CIT(A) found that the payment made before the due date for filing of the return of income has to be allowed under Section 43B of the Act. Accordingly, the CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to verify whether the remittances were made before filing of the return of income and if it is paid, he directed that assessing officer to delete the addition. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that in view of proviso to Section 43B, the payment made by the assessee towards employers and employees contribution for ESI & Provident Fund has to be allowed if the same is paid before the due date for filing of the return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act. Therefore, the CIT has rightly directed the assessing officer to verify the exact date of payment and if it is paid within the due date for filing of the return of income under Section 139(1) to allow the same. Accordingly, we do not find any reason to interfere with the orders of the lower authorities and the same is confirmed.

4.

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed.

Order pronounced on 23rd September, 2016 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 43B

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →