GUNNEBO INDIA EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ,MUMBAI V. ITO WARD 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4193/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Gunnebo India Employees Provident Fund appealing against the order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-8, Delhi, which sustained the denial of exemption under section 10(25) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2016-17. The Assessing Officer had initially denied the exemption, determining the assessed income at Rs. 10,51,424. The appeal was admitted despite a delay of 54 days, as the Tribunal found reasonable cause for the delay. The key argument from the assessee was the receipt of approval for the Provident Fund Scheme from the PCIT, Thane-I, which was effective from a date prior to the assessment year in question. This approval was not presented to the Ld.CIT(A) before the passing of the impugned order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 713326 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURENDRA MOHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: HEMLATA BHUNGARE
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Competent authority
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “SMC” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 4193/Mum/2025 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Gunnebo India Employees Provident Fund, Unit No.2, 1st Floor, Akruti SMC, Next to MSRTC Depot, LBS Marg, Khopat, Thane (W), Mumbai-400601. PAN : AAAAS5921K vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Thane-400601. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Ms. Hemlata Bhungare For Revenue : Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 30-07-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 31-07-2025 O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-8, Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], dated 28-02-2025, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17. 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 54 days in filing the appeal as pointed out by the Registry. After hearing both the parties and taking into consideration the affidavit placed on record seeking condonation of delay, we find that there was reasonable cause for the delay Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 4193/Mum/2025 in filing the present appeal and hence, the delay is hereby condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. During the course of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessment in this case was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act, wherein the AO has determined the assessed income at Rs. 10,51,424/-, after denying the claim of exemption u/s.10(25) of the Act and which has since been sustained by the Ld.CIT(A). 4. In this regard, our reference was drawn to the application filed by the assessee in accordance with the sub-rule (51) of Rule 77 before the competent authority and it was submitted that the assessee has since received the necessary approval in respect of its Provident Fund Scheme from the ld. PCIT, Thane -1 vide order dt. 30-04-2024 and which is effective from 30-09-1950 and, therefore, the assessee is eligible for exemption u/s. 10(25) of the Act. It was submitted that though the said approval was granted on 30-04-2024, however, the same could not be brought to the notice of the Ld.CIT(A) before passing of the impugned order dated 28-02-2025. It was submitted that since the said approval has been granted, the matter is no more in dispute and, therefore, the assessee be allowed the necessary exemption u/s. 10(25) of the Act. 5. Per contra, the Ld.DR has been heard, who has relied on the order of the authorities below. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. We find that the assessee‟s Provident Fund Scheme has been granted the necessary approval by the Ld.PCIT, Thane-I, vide order dt. 30-04-2024 and the same has been made effective from Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 4193/Mum/2025 30-09-1950, which covers the impugned assessment year and a copy thereof has been placed on record. In the light of the same, the assessee deserves the necessary exemption u/s 10(25) of the Act and, therefore, the addition so made by the AO is hereby directed to be deleted. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 31-07-2025. Sd/- Sd/- [RAHUL CHAUDHARY] [VIKRAM SINGH YADAV] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 31-07-2025 TNMM Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT concerned 4) The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai 5) Guard file By Order Dy./Asst. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "