MAHACHAND PANNALAL AND SONS, Jaipur V. DCIT, Jaipur

ITA 253/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5130 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA CIT DR DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: MUKESH GOYAL
• Section: 43B; 143(3)

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 HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 253/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 M/S. MAHACHAND PANNA LAL & SONS MALPURA HOUSE, MSB KA RASTA JOHRI BAZAR, JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE DCIT CIRCLE- 2 JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AADFM 1425 G VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY: SHRI MUKESH GOYAL, CA JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY :SHRI R.A. VERMA, ADDL CIT-. DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 25/07/2016 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 /07/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER BHAGCHAND, AM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDE R OF THE LD. CIT(A), ALIGARH AT JAIPUR (CAMP OFFICE) DATED 18-1 2-2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 RAISING THEREIN FOLLOWING G ROUNDS:- 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW I N CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 19,856/- ON ACCOUNT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO ESI U/S 43B READ WITH SEC TION 36(1)(VA) AND 2(24)(X) ITA NO. 253/JP/2016 M/S. MAHACHAND PANNA LAL & SONS VS. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2 , JAIPUR . 2 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF RS.33,626/- ON ACCOUNT O F EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO PF U/S 43B READ WITH SECT ION 36(1) (VA) AND 2(23)(X) 2.1 THE FACTS RELATING TO THESE GROUNDS ARE THAT TH E CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ASSESSED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 28-10-2010 A T A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 27,29,911/-. ON PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT RECOR D, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED THE PAYMENT OF ESI AND PF TO THE RESPECTIVE FUND AFTER THE DUE DATE. HENCE THE AO DI SALLOWED A SUM OF RS. 19,856/- IN RESPECT OF ESI CONTRIBUTION AND A SUM OF RS. 33,626/- IN RESPECT OF PF CONTRIBUTION TOTALING TO RS. 53,482/ - AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WHICH THE ASSE SSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I UPHOLD THE AOS ACTION OF DISALLOWING EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO ESI AND PF PA ID BEYOND THE DATE INCLUDING THE GRACE PERIOD. THUS THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE DISMISSED. 2.2 THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING PRAYED THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE D ISALLOWANCES ON ACCOUNT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO ESI U/S 43B R EAD WITH SECTION 36(1)(VA) AND 2(24)(X) OF THE ACT AND ON ACCOUNT OF EMPLOYEES ITA NO. 253/JP/2016 M/S. MAHACHAND PANNA LAL & SONS VS. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2 , JAIPUR . 3 CONTRIBUTION TO PF U/S 43B READ WITH SECTION 36(1)( VA) AND 2(24)(X) OF THE ACT. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE ALSO RELIED ON FOLLOWING CASE LAWS TO THIS EFFECT. (I) CIT VS. UDAIPUR DUGDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD. , 366 ITR 163 (RAJ.) (II) CIT VS. JAIPUR VIDYUT VITARAN NIGAM LTD. 363 ITR 307 (RAJ) 2.3 THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AU THORITIES. 2.4 I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AS TO THE ISSUES OF ESI AND PF CONTRIBUTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. I HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH BOTH THE DEC ISIONS OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURTS IN THE CASES OF CIT VS. UDAIPUR DUGDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD. AND CIT VS. JAIPUR VIDY UT VITARAN NIGAM LTD. (SUPRA). FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND BREVI TY, THE OBSERVATION OF THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F CIT VS. JAIPUR VIDYUT VITARAN NIGAM LTD. IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED PAYMENT OF GPF, CPF AND ESI U/ S 36(1)(VA) R.W.S. 43B OF THE IT ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME WAS D EPOSITED ON OR BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FURNISHING THE IT RETURN U/S 139. THE AO DISALLO WED THE PAYMENT ON THE GROUND THAT THOUGH THE AMOUNT WAS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE, BU T WAS NOT PAID WITHIN THE DUE DATE AS GIVEN UNDER THE RESPECTIVE ACTS OF GPF, CPF AND ESI. IT WAS HELD THAT THE EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS GPF, CPF AND ESI DE POSITED BY THE ASSESSEE ON OR BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING THE RETURN U/S 139, T HOUGH BEYOND THE DUE DATES AS GIVEN UNDER THE RESPECTIVE ACTS, CANNOT BE DISALLOWED U/S 43B OR 36(1)(VA). ITA NO. 253/JP/2016 M/S. MAHACHAND PANNA LAL & SONS VS. DCIT, CIRCLE- 2 , JAIPUR . 4 HENCE, IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DECISIONS OF HON'BLE JU RISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, I FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONF IRMING THE DISALLOWANCES OF RS. 19,856/- ON ACCOUNT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTI ON TO ESI AND RS. 33,626/- ON ACCOUNT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO P F. HENCE, THE ADDITIONS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ARE DELETED. THUS BOTH THE GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26 /07/2 016 SD/- HKKXPUN ( BHAGCHAND) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 26 /07/ 2016 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- M/S. MAHACHAND PANNA LAL & SONS, JAI PUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 2,JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 253/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR