ACIT, CHENNAI V. Buzzworks Business Services Pvt. Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 210/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4363 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 23-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PAVUNA SUNDARI
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , , ' # BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.210/MDS/2017 & '& / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI - 600 034. V. M/S BUZZWORKS BUSINESS SERVICES PVT. LTD., FLAT #2A, 2 ND FLOOR, JADE TERRACE, NO.27, BALFOUR ROAD, KILPAUK, CHENNAI - 600 002. PAN : AACCB 8364 P ()*/ APPELLANT) (+,)*/ RESPONDENT) )* - . / APPELLANT BY : SMT. PAVUNA SUNDARI, JCIT +,)* - . / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE / - 0' / DATE OF HEARING : 01.06.2017 12' - 0' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.06.2017 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -1, CHENNA I, DATED 21.11.2016 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS DISAL LOWANCE OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS PF AND ESI. 2 I.T.A. NO.210/MDS/17 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIV E AND THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO ESI AND PF WERE PAID BEFORE THE DUE DATE FOR FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME UNDER SECTION 139(1) OF THE IN COME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). THE ONLY CONTENTION OF THE LD. D.R. BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL IS THAT THE CBDT ISSUED CIRCULAR ON 1 7.12.2015 AFTER THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT IN CIT V. INDUSTR IAL SECURITY & INTELLIGENCE INDIA PVT. LTD. IN TAX CASE (APPEAL) N OS,585 AND 586 OF 2015 DATED 24.07.2015. THEREFORE, THE CIRCULAR ISS UED BY THE CBDT WOULD PREVAIL OVER THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COUR T. WE ARE UNABLE TO ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. D.R. TH E JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT CANNOT BE OVERRULED BY AN EXECUTI VE ORDER OF THE CBDT. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION T HAT THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT CAN BE OVERRULED ONLY BY THE J UDGMENT OF APEX COURT AND NOT BY ANY OF THE EXECUTIVE AUTHORIT IES IN THE COUNTRY. THEREFORE, UNLESS AND UNTIL THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT IS OVERRULED BY APEX COURT, THE CBDT CANNOT I SSUE ANY CIRCULAR CONTRADICTING THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT. IN OTHER WORDS, THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT WOULD PREV AIL OVER THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY CBDT. HENCE, THE CIT(APPEALS) HA S RIGHTLY 3 I.T.A. NO.210/MDS/17 FOLLOWED THE JUDGMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT AND ALLO WED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT F IND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 9 TH JUNE, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( . . . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 9 TH JUNE, 2017. KRI. - +056 76'0 /COPY TO: 1. )* /APPELLANT 2. +,)* /RESPONDENT 3. / 80 () /CIT(A)-1, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-1, CHENNAI 5. 69 +0 /DR 6. :& ; /GF.