TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee. - ITA No. 845/Chny/2020 - - - Dated:- 18-11-2021 - SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by : Mr. Y. Sridhar, C.A Respondent by : Mr. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT ORDER Per V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chennai in I.T.A No.3/CIT(A)/2019-20 dated 28.08.2020 relevant to the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee-company has paid employees contribution of ESI and Provident Fund with the delay. However, the same was remitted before due date of filing of return. The Assessing Officer (A.O) has disallowed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee has not specifically explained why the delay of 10 days in filing the appeal. We have considered the explanation given by the assessee for the delay and we find that there is sufficient cause to condone the delay. Generally when there is a delay before the Ld. CIT(A), it has to refer to Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay or the Tribunal may condone the delay and remit the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the same on merits. In this case, the issue involved in this appeal has already been covered by the decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court (supra), we are of the opinion that in the interest of justice, the delay has to be condoned and the appeal has to be disposed off by following the judgment of the Hon bl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT V. Alom Extrusions Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 306, decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V. Aimil Ltd. reported in 321 ITR 508 and that of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Venkateswara Electrical Industries P. Ltd. V. DCIT in ITA Nos.1344, 1345 and 1636/Mds/ 2014 dated 28.8.2014 held as follows: 5. Heard both sides. Perused orders of lower authorities and the decisions relied on before us. It is not in dispute that all these payments of provident fund ₹ 16,20,571/- and ESI ₹ 17,51,490/- were made beyond the grace period/due date allowed under Provident Fund ESI Acts but before d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cit Vs. Aimil Ltd., reported as 321 ITR 508 has held that if the assessee had deposited employees contribution towards Provident Fund and ESI after due date as prescribed under the relevant Act but before the due date of filing of return under the Income Tax Act, no disallowance could be made in view of the provisions of section 43B as amended by the Finance Act, 2003. The decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has been followed by the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of JCIT Vs. M/s. S.M. Apparels (P) Ltd. (supra). The Tribunal has been consistently following the view taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court. Accordingly, we hold that the assessee is entitled to claim expe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n beyond the due date for payment, but within the due date for filing the return of income. Hence, following the above-said decisions, we find no reason to differ with the findings of the Tribunal. Accordingly, we find no question of law much less any substantial question of law arises for consideration in these appeals. Accordingly, both the Tax Case (Appeals) stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 is also dismissed. 8. In the present case, the assessee has remitted the employees contribution in respect of PF ESI beyond due date for payment but within due date of filing of return of income. Thus, we respectfully following the decision of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Industrial Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
