TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 833X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st revenue. - ITA No. 1287/JP/2019 - - - Dated:- 18-1-2021 - SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM And SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM Revenue by : Shri Mukesh Verma (CIT-DR) Assessee by : P. C. Parwal (CA) ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J. M. The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-2, Jaipur dated 03/09/2019 for the A.Y. 2016-17, wherein the Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 6,88,83,063/- made for depositing the employees contribution to PF ESI beyond the prescribed time limited provided in the respective Acts. 2. Whether in the fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vailable on record. We have also perused the orders of the authorities below carefully. From perusal of the record, we found that the ld. CIT(A) has deleted the disallowances by following the decision of Coordinate Bench of the Jaipur ITAT in the case of M/s K.S. Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 1184/JP/2018 and 1185/JP/2018 order dated 08/03/2019. The ld. CIT(A) has dealt with the issue in para 2.3 of her impugned order as under: 2.3 I have perused the facts of the case, the assessment order and the submissions of the appellant. The Ld. Authorized Representative argued that assessee deposited PF CPF and GPF contribution after the due date but before due date of filing of return of income. I find that in a recent case of M/s K.S. Autom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e decisions of this Court in Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax V/s Rajasthan state seed Corporation Ltd. [2016] 386ITR 267 (Raj) wherein it has been held as under:- In so far as the expenditure incurred on State Renewal Fund is concerned, the said expenditure also goes to show that the renewal fund was set up by the State Government and was created with the object of providing a safety net for the workers likely to be effected by restricting in the State Public Enterprise and that a finding of fact has been recorded that the contribution made to the State Renewal fund is solely for the purposes of the welfare and benefit of the employees. In our view, it is for the assessee to decide whether any expenditure should be incurred in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herein it is stated these issues decided in favour of the Department and against the assessee . The whole decision of the Hon'ble High Court has to be considered in the contest of the decision followed and the subsequent line which says it will be opened for the Department to recover the amount if the decision in their favour which means that in case of further appeal before Hon'ble Supreme Court if decision is delivered in favour of the department it can recover the amount. Therefore, even the decision which relied upon the Id. CIT(A) the same is in favour of the assessee though due to typographical mistake it was misunderstood by the Id. CIT(A) as in favour of the Revenue. Accordingly, in view of a series of decisions of the Ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roviso to section 43B and insertion of the new proviso regarding allowance of any sum paid by him as an employer subject to payment before the due date of furnishing of the return should apply to section 36(1)(va) simultaneously. The reply of the assessee was not found acceptable by the AO. The AO was of the opinion that as per the provisions of section 2(24)(x) of the Act the same is an income of the assessee and can be allowed as deduction only, if such contributions was actually paid on or before due date mentioned in the relevant Act or Rules. In this case, the assessee made the above payments amounting to ₹ 19,73,42,499/- after the prescribed due date. Hence, it forms the taxable income of the assessee as per section 2(24)(x) or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SLP. In view of above, all the aforesaid appeals are disposed of accordingly. 2.7 Respectfully following the order of the Coordinate Bench, Jaipur in assessee s own case which has been confirmed by the Hon ble High Court (supra), we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the ld. CIT(A). 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances and by respectfully following the order of the Coordinate Bench, Jaipur in assessee s own case for the A.Y. 2007-08, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the ld. CIT(A) qua this issue. Hence, we uphold the same. 8. In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 18th January, 2021. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
