Marudhar Polycot (India) Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad V. The Dy. CIT. Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 2868/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0539 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 18-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: L P JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: PF JAIN
• Section: 43B; 28

Judgement Text

MARUDHAR POLYCOT (INDIA) PVT. LTD. V. DCIT-2(1)(2) AHMEDABAD /I.T.A.NO.2868/AHD/2017/A.Y. 14-15 1 , C IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CBENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI O. P MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER . . /. I.T.A NO.2868/AHD/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 M/S. MARUDHAR POLYCOT (INDIA) PVT. LTD. , 406 DWARKESH COMPLEX , 4 TH FLOOR , OPP. PATEL VAS, MITHAKHALI GAM, MITHAKHALI AHMEDABAD 380006 PAN: AADCM 8286 G VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(1)(2) NAVJIVAN TRUST BUILDING, ASHRAM ROAD AHMEDABAD 380 009 APPELLANT / RESPONDENT /ASSESSEE BY SHRI P. F. JAIN , CA /REVENUE BY SHRI L. P. JAIN , SR. D.R. / DATE OF HEARING: 1 7 .09.2019 /PRONOUNCEMENT ON 1 7 .09.2019 /O R D E R PER O. P. MEENA, AM: 1. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, AHMEDABAD ( IN SHORT THE CIT (A)) DATED 08.11.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014 -15. 2. GROUND NO. 1 TO 2 ARE AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF D ISALLOWANCE OF RS. 3,98, 789 FOR LATE PAYMENT OF PF AND ESIC. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE CIT (A) HAS CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE FOLLOWING THE JUDGEMENT OF HON`BLE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION MARUDHAR POLYCOT (INDIA) PVT. LTD. V. DCIT-2(1)(2) AHMEDABAD /I.T.A.NO.2868/AHD/2017/A.Y. 14-15 2 [2014] 366 ITR 170 (GUJ) : 223 TAXMAN 398 : [2014] 41 TAXMANN.COM 100 (2014) (1) TML 502 -GUJ-HC. THE APPEAL FILED BY GSR TC IS PRESENTLY PENDING FOR ADJUDICATION BEFORE THE HON`BLE SUPREME COURT. 4. AU CONTRAIRE , THE LD. DR, SUBMITS THAT THE ISSUE IS SQUAR ELY COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURTS JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, 3 66 ITR 170 (GUJ.), WHEREIN IT IS CATEGORICALLY HELD THAT IN THE CASE OF DELAY ED DEPOSIT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO PF, THE SAME WILL NOT BE DEDU CTIBLE IN COMPUTING INCOME UNDER SECTION 28 OF THE ACT. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION [2014] 366 ITR 170 (GUJ) : 2 23 TAXMAN 398 : [2014] 41 TAXMANN.COM 100 (2014) (1) TML 502 -GUJ-HC, WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT SECTION 43B DOES NOT APPLY TO EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION. ONLY SECTION 2 (24) (X) READ WITH SECTION 36(1)(VA) IS APPLICABLE AND THEREFORE, EMPL OYEES CONTRIBUTION IS DISALLOWED IF NOT PAID WITHIN DUE DATES PRESCRIBED UNDER RELE VANT PROVIDENT FUND /ESI ACT. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT T HERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES IN MAKING DISALLOWANCE IN THE LIGHT OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE ABOVE CASE (S UPRA). THE LAW SO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IS BINDING ON US. THE MERE FACT THAT AN APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID DECISION IS PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT DOES NOT DILUTE THE BINDING NATURE OF THIS JUDICIAL PREC EDENT. WE, THEREFORE, SEE NO MARUDHAR POLYCOT (INDIA) PVT. LTD. V. DCIT-2(1)(2) AHMEDABAD /I.T.A.NO.2868/AHD/2017/A.Y. 14-15 3 LEGALLY SUSTAINABLE MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HI GH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION [2 014] 366 ITR 170 (GUJ) : 223 TAXMAN 398 : [2014] 41 TAXMANN.COM 100 (2014) (1) T ML 502 -GUJ-HC (SUPRA). IN THE LIGHT OF ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE GROUNDS OF APPEA L OF THE ASSESSEE IS BEING DEVOID OF ANY MERIT, IS THEREFORE, DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. 7. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.09.2 019 SD/- SD/- (MADHUMITA ROY) (O.P.MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED: 17 SEPTEMBER, 2019/OPM COPY OF ORDER SENT TO- ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A) / ITAT (DR)/GUARD FILE OF ITAT. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, AHMEDABAD STANDARD PREPARATION & DELIVERY OF ORDERS IN THE IT AT 1 DATE OF DICTATION 17.09.2019 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE AUTHOR 17.09.2019 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE SECOND MEMBER 17.09.2019 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/ APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 17.09.2019 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO SR. PS /PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 7 DATE OF UPLOADING ORDER ON THE WEB SITE 1 8 . 9 . 2 0 1 9 8 FILE SENT TO BENCH CLERK 1 8 . 9 . 2 0 1 9 9 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE A.R. FOR SIGNATU RE ON THE ORDER 10 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO HEAD CLERK 1 1 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER