9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1598X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order dated 12/07/2016 for A.Y. 2013-14 passed by CIT(A)-7, New Delhi. 2. The Ground of appeal is as under: 1. "On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 7,91,59,691/- made by the AO without appreciating the fact that the assessee company did not comply with t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of furnishing the return u/s. 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) held that in view of the legal position in case of CIT vs. M/s. Vinay Cement Ltd. 213 ITR 268 decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and in case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd. (2010) 321 ITR 508 decided by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, the Assessing Officer was not justified in making the disallowance and deleted the same. 5. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and also that of Apex Court in case of CIT vs. M/s. Vinay Cement Ltd. 213 ITR 268. The Assessing Officer has not at all distinguished the facts of the assessee and the facts mentioned in these two judgments. There is clear finding by the CIT(A) that the assessee paid the Employees' contribution to Provident Fund, ESIC and Professional Tax before the due date o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
