DCIT 15(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. PRINT HOUSE (INDIA) P.LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4143/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 August 2016AY 2011-123 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 if the employee's contribution to PF is paid before the due date of filing the return of income, it is allowable. The appeal by the revenue was not maintainable based on CBDT instructions.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer disallowed the employees' contribution to PF for the assessment year 2011-12, stating it was paid after the due date. The CIT(A) allowed the assessee's claim, relying on High Court decisions.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance of employees' contribution to PF paid after the due date is justified, and if Section 43B applies to such payments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va),Section 2(24)(X),Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C. SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM

For Appellant: Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke

सुनवाई की तायीख / : 21/07/2016 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : 03.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C. SHARMA, A. M.: This is an Appeal by the Revenue directed against the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 24, Mumbai (‘CIT(A)’ for short) dated 09.04.2015 for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2011-12.

(A.Y. 2011-12) DCIT vs. Print House (India) P. Ltd. 2. In this appeal revenue is aggrieved for deleting disallowance made by AO u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(X) of the Act. We have gone through orders of authorities below and found that AO has disallowed employees contribution to PF u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(X) on the plea it was paid after due date.

3.

By the impugned order CIT(A) allowed assessee’s claim by observing as under: “I have carefully considered the finding of the AO and the submissions above. In support of the contention that section 43B is not applicable to payments made beyond the due date in respect of employees contribution to PF/ESIC as per provisions of section 36(1)(va) the appellant relied on the decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of M/s. Pranav Aditya Spinning Mills in and the jurisdictional HC decision in the case of Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd. 366 ITR 1. I find the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the High Court in the above mentioned case.”

4.

The issue under consideration is squarely covered by the Bombay High Court 366 ITR 1 wherein it was held that if the contribution is paid before last date u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(X) the same cannot be disallowed. Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusion Ltd 319 ITR 306 held that provision to section 43B by the Finance Act 2003 … retrospective w.e.f. 01.04.1998. Accordingly contribution payable by the employee to the PF or any other mode for the welfare of the employees was allowable if paid before due date of filing return

(A.Y. 2011-12) DCIT vs. Print House (India) P. Ltd. of income. In this case CIT(A) disallowed the disallowance of Rs.19.67 lakhs even tax effect is less than Rs.10 lakhs. In terms of Circular CBDT Instruction No.21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 appeal of revenue is not maintainable.

5.

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd August, 2016 Sd/- Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (R.C. SHARMA) न्मायमक सदस्म / Judicial Member रेखा सदस्म / Accountant Member भुंफई Mumbai; ददनांक Dated : 03.08.2016 Ps. Ashwini आदेश की प्रनिलऱपि अग्रेपषि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीराथी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent 2. आमकय आमुक्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A) 3. आमकय आमुक्त / CIT - concerned 4. ववबागीम प्रयतयनधध, आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भुंफई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड पाईर / Guard File 6. आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER,

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 →