TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Gujarat High Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Suzlon Energy Ltd. [ 2020 (2) TMI 792 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] held that where assessee had not deposited employees' contributions towards PF and ESI within prescribed period in law and Assessing Officer by invoking provisions of section 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) made addition of aforesaid amount to income of assessee, impugned addition made to income of assessee was justified. - Decided against assessee. - ITA No. 1328/Ahd/2019 - - - Dated:- 13-4-2022 - Shri Ms. Annapurna Gupta , Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal , Judicial Member Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri Purushottam Kumar , Sr. D. R. ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL , JUDICIAL MEMBER : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f section 43B r.w.s 36(1)(va) of the Act having regards to the decision of the Hon'ble apex court in the case of Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd. 3. The appellant craves to add to, amend or alter the above grounds as may be deemed necessary. Relief Claimed in appeal The order of the CIT(A) on the above issue of addition of Rs. 8,54,455/- be set aside and addition made by AO shall be deleted. 3. The assessee has filed an application seeking adjournment stating that he has to get certain instructions from the client. However, none appeared in person on behalf of the assessee. We note that there is only one issue involved which is disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act on account of late payment of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other fund for the welfare of the such employees is to be treated as income and on fulfilling the condition as mentioned under section 36(1)(va), the assessee shall be entitled to deduction with respect to such employees' contribution. In this case the assessee has not paid the employee contribution collected from employees within time limit as specified in the ESIC/PF Act. Therefore, Rs. 8,54,455/- is hereby disallowed u/s. 36(1) (va) read with sub-clause 24 of section 2 of Income Tax Act and added back to the total income of assessee. [Addition of Rs. 8,54,455/-] 5. In appeal before ld. CIT(A), he dismissed the assessee's appeal by relying on the Gujarat High Court decision in the case of Gujarat State Road Transportati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 8,54,455/- made u/s. 36(1)(va) r.w.s 2(24) stands upheld. Appellant fails on Ground No. 4. 7. Ground No. 5, 6 7 pertain to charging of interest u/s. 234A, 234B and 234D of the Act which is consequential in nature. There being no specified arguments put forth, I cannot give and relief as of now. These Grounds are dismissed. 8. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. 6. Before us none appeared on behalf of the assessee. We note that the issue is squarely covered against the assessee by the Jurisdictional High Court decision in case of Gujarat State Road Transportation Corporation (2014) 4 taxman.com 100, wherein it was held that where assessee did not deposit employees' contribution to employees' account in relev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
