TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1043X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich have been referred to by the Tribunal and the CIT(A) and held in favour of the Revenue. Considering these facts, we are of the view that the matters should be remanded to the CIT(A) for a fresh consideration. We propose to send the matters back to the CIT(A) for the reason that the CIT(A) did not give a reasoned finding on this aspect while deleting the addition on account of the delay in payment of provident fund and delayed payment of the employees state insurance. Hence, we deem it appropriate that the matters should be remanded to the CIT(A) for a fresh consideration - Tax Case Appeal Nos.430 & 421 of 2019 & CMP.No.13978 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 8-7-2019 - Mr. Justice T.S. Sivagnanam And Mrs. Justice V. Bhavani Subbaroyan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai- 34 [for short, the CIT(A)] in so far as the disallowance under Section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 5. We find from the common order passed by the Tribunal that none appeared for the assessee before the Tribunal. We are informed that the respondent - assessee is under liquidation and that proceedings are pending before the NCLT. Presumably, for such a reason, the respondent assessee was not represented before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue by taking note of the decision of this Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s.Industrial Security Intelligence India Pvt. Ltd. [TCA. Nos.585 and 586 of 2015 dated 24.7.2015] . We find that the grounds raised by the Revenue befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No.22 of 2015 dated 17.12.2015 wherein it was clarified that the deductions relating to employee's contribution to welfare funds are governed by Section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 2.7. The learned CIT(A) ought to have taken cognizance to the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s.Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Ltd. [(2014) 366 ITR 170], the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s.Madras Radiators Pressings Ltd. [264 ITR 620], the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT, Cochin Vs. M/s.Merchem Ltd. [reported in (2015) 378 ITR 443] and the decisions of the Hon'ble ITAT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e view that the matters should be remanded to the CIT(A) for a fresh consideration. We propose to send the matters back to the CIT(A) for the reason that the CIT(A) did not give a reasoned finding on this aspect while deleting the addition of ₹ 15,79,41,125/- on account of the delay in payment of provident fund and ₹ 1,32,96,164/- in respect of the delayed payment of the employees state insurance. Hence, we deem it appropriate that the matters should be remanded to the CIT(A) for a fresh consideration. The CIT(A) should issue notice to the respondent assessee and take a fresh decision in the matters after taking note of the legal principle laid in the various decisions rendered after the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Amil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
