Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 1135 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - delayed payments toward employees provident fund - As per CIT, assessee had made payments toward employees provident fund after due date as prescribed in section 36(1)(va) and AO has not disallowed the same while finalising the assessment and the AO has simply accepted the assessee submission on its face value without inquiring into such claim - HELD THAT:- The issue whether deduction respect of late deposit of employee’s provident fund can be granted has been decided against the assessee in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transportation Corporation [2014 (1) TMI 502 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] wherein it was held that where assessee did not deposit employees' contribution to employees' account in relevant fund before due date prescribed in Explanation to section 36(1)(va), no deduction would be admissible even though he deposits same before due date under section 43B of the Act. Again the Gujarat High Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Suzlon Energy Ltd. [2020 (2) TMI 792 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] held that where assessee had not deposited employees' contributions towards PF and ESI amounting Rs. 15.20 lakhs within prescribed period in law and Assessing Officer by invoking provisions of section 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) made addition of aforesaid amount to income of assessee, impugned addition made to income of assessee was justified. Accordingly, when the issue has been decided by the Gujarat High Court against the assessee, it was on duty of the AO to conduct enquiries in respect of same, and not accept the submission of the assessee on its face value. In the instant facts, no such enquiry was conducted by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. In view of the above findings, we find no infirmity in the order of the Principal CIT u/s 263 of the Act. - Decided against assessee.
|