9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 778X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aroj Kumar Parida, Advocate ORDER PER S.S. Godara, Judicial Member This Revenue's appeal arises from the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-VI, Chennai, dated 29-09-2011, in ITA No. 378/2010- 2011, for assessment year 2003-04, in proceedings under section 154 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 [in short the "Act"]. 2. The sole issue agitated in this case by the Revenue i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed its 'return' admitting total income of Rs. 68,40,565/-. On 17.03.06, the Assessing Officer had finalised 'scrutiny' assessment, inter alia, making disallowance under Sec. 43(B) of the Act of Rs. 33,03,051/- towards employer's contribution to the PF/ESI and also Rs. 24,70,823/- pertaining to employees contribution which was added under section 2(24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1) of the Act. In appeal, the CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 33,03,051/-(supra) which was earlier disallowed under section 43(B) of the Act. This prompted the assessee to file a petition under section 154, inter alia, praying that it is also entitled for relief of Rs. 24,70,823 added by the Assessing Officer earlier, the consequential order needs to be rectified. As we find from the rectification order dated 30.03.2010, the Assessing Officer held that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or relief if actual payment is made before due date of filing the return. Admittedly, even the consequential order dated 31.12.2009 contains a finding of fact that the amount had been deposited before filing of the 'return'. Therefore we hold that CIT(A) has rightly interfered in the finding of the Assessing Officer. 9. Consequentially, the Revenue's appeal stands dismissed being devoid of merits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
