JYOTI AUTOMOBILE PRIVATE LIMITED, Alwar V. DCIT, Alwar

ITA 1110/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9720 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 15-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POONAM ROY DCIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJIV SOGANI
• Section: 139

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ] DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 1110/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 JYOTI AUTOMOBILE PRIVATE LIMITED, C/O- M/S FORTUNE CARS, A-97, (A TO D), MAIN ROAD, NEELAM CHOWK, BHIWADI, ALWAR (RAJ). CUKE VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, ALWAR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AABCJ 8110 A VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJIV SOGANI (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. POONAM ROY (DCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 20/02/2017 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09/03/2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11/11/2016 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), ALWAR JAIPUR FO R THE A.Y. 2012- 13. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS REGARD ING SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,39,222/- ON ACCOUNT OF LATE DEPOS ITION OF CONTRIBUTION OF PF AND ESI. ITA 1110/JP/2016_ JYOTI AUTOMOBILE PVT. LTD. VS DCIT 2 2. AT THE OUTSET, OF HEARING, THE LD AR OF THE ASSE SSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THIS ISSUE IS ALREADY COVERED BY THE VARIOUS DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTION HIGH COURT AND ALSO THE DE CISION OF THE HONBLE ITAT, JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. HE PLACED RELIANCE ON TH E DECISION OF HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. STATE BANK OF BIKANER & JAIPUR (2014) 43, TAXMANN.COM 411 (RAJ), CIT VS. JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. (2014) 49 TAXMANN.COM 540 (RAJ). HE ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE JAI PUR BENCH OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. RAJASTHAN STATE COOPERATIVE OIL SEED GROWERS FEDERATION LTD. IN ITA NO. 615/JP/2013 ORDER DATED 01/01/2016 AND DCIT VS. AMIT BASU IN ITA NO. 765/JP/2011 ORDER DATE D 25/01/2012. 3. THE LD. DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHOR ITIES BELOW. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. THE A SSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED THE EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION OF PF AT RS. 1 ,33,271 AND EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO ESI AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,05 ,951/- BEFORE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN U/S 139(1) OF THE INCOME TA X ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). THIS ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY TH E DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CI T(A) SBBJ (SUPRA) WHEREIN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT HAS HELD AS UNDER:- ITA 1110/JP/2016_ JYOTI AUTOMOBILE PVT. LTD. VS DCIT 3 22. WE HAVE ALREADY OBSERVED THAT TILL THIS PROVIS ION WAS BROUGHT IN AS THE DUE AMOUNTS ON ONE PRETEST OR THE ORDER WERE NOT BEING DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEES THOU GH SUBSTANTIAL BENEFITS HAD BEEN OBTAINED BY THEM IN T HE SHAPE OF THE AMOUNT HAVING BEEN CLAIMED AS A DEDUCT ION BUT THE SAID AMOUNTS WERE NOT DEPOSITED. IT IS PERTI NENT TO NOTE THAT THE RESPECTIVE ACT SUCH AS PF ETC. ALS O PROVIDES THAT THE AMOUNTS CAN BE PAID LATER ON SUBJ ECT TO PAYMENT OF INTEREST AND OTHER CONSEQUENCES AND TO G ET BENEFIT UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT, AN ASSESSEE OUGHT TO HAVE ACTUALLY DEPOSITED THE ENTIRE AMOUNT AS ALSO T O ADDUCE EVIDENCE REGARDING SUCH DEPOSIT ON OR BEFORE THE RETURN OF INCOME UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 1 39 OF THE IT ACT. 23. THUS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT WHERE THE PF AND/OR E PF, CPF, GPF ETC., IF PAID AFTER THE DUE DATE UNDER RES PECTIVE ACT BUT BEFORE FILING OF THE RETURN OF INCOME UNDER SECTION 139(1), CANNOT BE DISALLOWED UNDER SECTION 4 3B OR UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VA) OF THE IT ACT. THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS ITAT HAS ALSO FOLLOWED TH E DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND VARIOUS D ECISIONS RELIED BY THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS AN D CIRCUMSTANCES, I SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND ALL OW THE ASSESSEES APPEAL. ITA 1110/JP/2016_ JYOTI AUTOMOBILE PVT. LTD. VS DCIT 4 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09/03/2017. SD/- HKKXPAN (BHAGCHAND) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 09 TH MARCH, 2017 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- JYOTI AUTOMOBILE PRIVATE LIMITED, BHIWADI, ALWAR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2, ALWAR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 1110/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR