9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 1066X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation whether all the payments of ESI/PF contribution of the employees were made before the date of the filing of the return of income or not. We feel it appropriate to restore this issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for verification of the claim of the assessee and decide accordingly. Appeal of the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA No.5915/Del./2019 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) - - - Dated:- 23-12-2020 - SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by Shri Satyaji Goel, Adv. Respondent by Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT(DR) ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 30/04/2019 passed by the learned Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ), the Assessing Officer made disallowance of ₹ 5,53,851/- for employees contribution to provident fund under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed part relief of ₹ 1,37,690/- and sustained the remaining addition of ₹ 4,16,161/-. Aggrieved, the assessee is before the Tribunal raising the ground as reproduced above. 3. Before us, both the parties appeared through videoconferencing facility. 4. The learned counsel of the assessee submitted that all the payments for employees contribution toward provident fund had been made before the due date of the filing of the return of income, however, the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly noted payment of ₹ 4,16, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s income. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. (2010) 321 ITR 508 has held that the assessee can get the benefit of deduction if the payment is made before the return is filed, as per the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Vinay Cement Ltd. 213 ITR 268.1 find that the appellant has paid the Employee s contribution to provident fund and ESI before the due date of furnishing the return u/s 139(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961. In view of the legal position on the issue, it is held that the AO was not justified in making the disallowance of ₹ 2,27,624/- which is ordered to be deleted. This ground of appeal is ruled in favour of the appellant. I have carefully consi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
