Milton Plywoods, Kurumathur V. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4, Kannur, Kannur

ITA 248/COCH/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7319 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-03-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 07-12-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण कोचीन पीठ, कोची Įी चंġा पुजारȣ, लेखा सदèय एवं Įी जॉज[ मा×तन, ÛयाǓयक सदèय के सम¢ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Chandra Poojari, AM & Shri George Mathan, JM आअसं. 248/कोची/2021 (Ǔन.व. 2017-18) ITA No. 248/Coch/2021 (AY: 2017-18) M/s. Milton Plywoods 23/5, Manchal, Kurumathur Taliparamba Kannur 670142, Vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward No. 4 Kannur 670006 PAN – AALFM0630P अपीलाथȸ/Appellant ĤǓतवादȣ/Respondent अपीलाथȸ ɮवारा/Appellant by: Shri Arun Raj S., Advocate ĤǓतवादȣ ɮवारा/Respondent by: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ/Date of Hearing: 09.03.2022 घोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ/Date of Pronouncement: 09.03.2022 आदेश/ ORDER Per: George Mathan, JM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in appeal No. CIT(A), Kozhikode/1086/2019-20 dated 30.09.2021 for AY 2017-18. 2. Shri Arun Raj S., Advocate represented the assessee and Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR represented Revenue. 3. It was submitted by the learned A.R. that the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed by the learned CIT(A) by not considering the ITA No. 248/Coch/2021 M/s. Milton Plywoods 2 arguments of the assessee. It was the submission that the AO had in the course of assessment disallowed the contribution to PF on the ground that the contribution exceeded 27% of the salary as debited to the P&L Account. It was further submitted that the deduction under PF was also to be considered in respect of the wages as quantified in Schedule 11 of the P&L Account. It was submitted that when this was submitted before the learned CIT(A), he refused to consider by holding that the claim ought to have been made before the AO with supporting evidence. It was the prayer that the issue may be restored to the AO for readjudication and the assessee would produce all the details before the AO. 4. In reply the learned D.R. vehemently supported the order of the learned CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer. 5. We have considered the rival contentions. As it has been specified by the assessee that wages have also to be considered when computing PF paid, so as to give an opportunity to both the sides, the assessee and Revenue, the assessee to produce evidence before the AO and the AO to examine the evidence, the issues in the appeal are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Dictated and pronounced in the open Court on 9 th March, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Chandra Poojari) (George Mathan) लेखा सदèय/Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय/Judicial Member कोचीन/Cochin, Ǒदनांक/Dated: 9 th March, 2022 ITA No. 248/Coch/2021 M/s. Milton Plywoods 3 ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथȸ/The Appellant 2. ĤǓतवादȣ/The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत(अ)/The CIT(A) -NFAC 4. आयकर आयुÈत/The CIT - concerned 5. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आय.अपी.अͬध., कोची/The DR, ITAT, Cochin 6. गाड[ फाइल/Guard File By Order //True Copy// Assistant Registrar ITAT, Cochin n.p.