Shrinath Spinners Pvt.Ltd.,, ... vs Assessee
- CitationITA No. 431/Ahd/2012
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The employee's contribution to the Provident Fund which is not deposited within the time prescribed by the Provident Fund Act is to be disallowed, as laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, and the Assessing Officer must re-examine and re-work any disallowance under section 43B in accordance with that decision.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ./ ITA No. 431/Ahd/2012 िनधा रण वष /Assessment Year: 1999-2000 Shrinath Spinners Pvt Ltd V/s. ACIT, H.P. House, Near Town Hall, Central Cicle-1(1) Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad PAN : AAECS 0478 H
अपीलाथ / अपीलाथ / (Appellant) ू यथ यथ / थ / (Respondent)
Assessee(s) by : Shri P.F. Jain, AR Revenue by : Shri Nimesh Yadav, Sr. DR.
सुनवाई क# तार%ख/ / Dateof Hearing : 26/05/2015 घोषणा क# तार%ख / Date of Pronouncement: 29/05/2015
आदे श/O R D E R
PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee and is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)-I, Ahmedabad dated 12.12.2011, pertaining to Assessment Year 1999-2000.
2. In this appeal by the assessee various grounds were raised, which read as under:-
1. The Ld. C.I.T. (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the disallowance u/s 43B of Rs.5,76,069/- without properly appreciating the facts of the appellant.
2. He has erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition on the ground of non attendance and not on merits without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the appellant. .
ITA No. 431/Ahd/2012 Shrinath Spinners Pvt Ltd vs. ACIT For AY 1999-2000 2
3. The reassessment proceedings u/s 147/148 are submitted to be bad-in-law and on facts as the conditions envisaged in the relevant sections are not fulfilled.
4. On the facts the returned loss ought to have been accepted without any modification.
5. The appellant craves leave to add / to alter and/or modify any grounds of appeal.
3. At the time of hearing before us, it was submitted by the ld. Counsel that the disallowances u/s 43B have been made by the Assessing Officer for delay in deposit of TDS in respect of employer's and employee's contribution to the Provident Fund. He pointed out that the payments have been made during the accounting year relevant to assessment year under consideration and certainly before the due date of filing of the return. Therefore, as per section 43B, no disallowance can be made. However, he was fair enough to mention that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, reported in [2014] 366 ITR 170 (Guj.), has held that the employee's contribution to the Provident Fund if not deposited within the time as prescribed by the Provident Fund Act is to be disallowed. He, therefore, submitted that the disallowance should be restricted and be worked out as per the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court.
4. The ld. Departmental Representative suggested that let the matter be sent back to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-examining the issue in light of the aforesaid decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (supra). The ld. Counsel for the assessee has also fairly agreed to the above suggestion of the ld. Departmental Representative.
ITA No. 431/Ahd/2012 Shrinath Spinners Pvt Ltd vs. ACIT For AY 1999-2000 3
5. In view of above, we set aside the orders of the authorities below and restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer. We direct him to re-examine the issue and re-work the disallowance as per the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (supra).
6. In the result, the assessee's appeal is deemed to be partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 29th May, 2015 at Ahmedabad.
Sd/- Sd/-
(KUL BHARAT) (G.D. AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 29/05/2015 Biju T., PS
षत Copy आदे श क# ूितिल+प अमे+षत/ of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. ू यथ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु- / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु-(अपील) / The CIT(A)
5. +वभागीय ूितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad
6. गाड फाईल / Guard file.
आ आ आ / BY ORDER, दे शानुसार आ
TRUE COPY Dy./Asstt.Registrar) उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( उप/ अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ITAT, Ahmedabad
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free