The ACIT,Circle-1, Kollam V. Mr.Binu John, Kollam

ITA 23/COCH/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0864 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2022
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2022
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 139(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Chandra Poojari, AM & Shri George George K, JM ITA No.23/Coch/2022 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 Sri.Binu John Johns Cashew Company Mukkodu P.O. Karippuram Kollam – 691 503. PAN : ADOPJ1427F. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle – 1 Kollam. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri. V.M.Veeramani, CA Respondent by : Smt.J.M.Jammuna Devi, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 02.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 03.08.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, JM : This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(A)’s order dated 22.11.2021. The relevant assessment year is 2014-2015. 2. The solitary issue raised is whether the CIT(A) is justified in confirming the disallowance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI u/s 36(1)(va) of the I.T.Act. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: For the assessment year 2014-2015, the employees’ contribution to PF and ESI was disallowed u/s 36(1)(va) of the I.T.Act, for not making payments within the due date prescribed under the relevant Acts. ITA No.23/Coch/2022. Sri.Binu John. 2 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) by following the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation reported in 366 ITR 170, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The learned AR relied on the submissions made before the Income Tax Authorities. 6. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the issue in question is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Merchem Limited (supra) and in the case of Popular Vehicles & Services Private Limited v. CIT (supra). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee is claiming deduction of delayed remittance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI, stating that the same has been deposited before the due date of filing return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. However, the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Merchem Limited (supra) and in the case of Popular Vehicles & Services Private Limited v. CIT (supra) had clearly held that employees’ share of PF and ESI, which was not deposited within the due date under the respective Acts, is not an allowable deduction u/s 36(1)(va) of the I.T.Act. Therefore, following the judgments of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. ITA No.23/Coch/2022. Sri.Binu John. 3 Merchem Limited (supra) and Popular Vehicles & Services Private Limited v. CIT (supra), we hold that since the employees’ contribution to PF and ESI was not deposited within the due date specified in the relevant Acts, the same cannot be allowed as a deduction u/s 36(1)(va) of the I.T.Act. It is ordered accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on this 03 rd day of August, 2022. Sd/- (Chandra Poojari) Sd/- (George George K) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Kochi ; Dated : 03 rd August, 2022. Devadas G* Copy to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A) NFAC Delhi 4. The CIT. 5. The DR, ITAT, Cochin. 6. Guard File. Asst.Registrar/ITAT, Cochin