DCIT, Tuticorin V. Raja Agencies, Tuticorin

ITA 339/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6049 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 13-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 06-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MRS S VIDYA CA MR A SRINIVASAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI . , ' , % & BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P.GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO.339/MDS/2017 %' ' /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX, CIRCLE-1, TUTICORIN 628 001. VS. M/S.RAJA AGENCIES, NO.1 BYE PASS ROAD, MADATHUR, TUTICORIN-628 008. [PAN: AABFR 9434 Q] ( ( /APPELLANT) ( )*( /RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : MRS.S.VIDYA, CA DEPARTMENT BY : MR.A. SRINIVASAN, JCIT , /DATE OF HEARING : 25.09.2017 , /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26.09.2017 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER : ITA NO.339/MDS/2017 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVE NUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1 , MADURAI, IN ITA NO.0041/2016-17 DATED 07.11.2016 FOR THE AY 2013-14 . 2. MR.A. SRINIVASAN, JCIT, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND MRS.S.VIDYA, CA, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSES SEE. ITA NO.339/MDS/2017 :- 2 -: 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT GROUND NOS.2. 1 & 2.2 WERE AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN ALLOWING THE ASSESSEES CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION OF THE EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS PF & ESI PAID BEFORE THE DUE DATE FOR FILING OF RETURN U/S.139(1). THE LD.D R VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE AO. 4. IN REPLY, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTION AL HIGH COURT OF MADRAS IN THE CASE OF INDUSTRIAL SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE (INDIA) PVT. LTD. IN TC NOS.585 & 586/2015 DATED 24.07.2015 WHEREIN THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAD FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ALOM EXTRUSIONS REPORTED IN 319 ITR 306 AN D HAS HELD THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN SO FAR AS IF THE EMPLOYEE S CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS PF & ESI IS DEPOSITED AFTER THE DUE DATE AS PRESCRI BED UNDER THE RELEVANT ACT BUT BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF THE RETURN UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT, NO DISALLOWANCE COULD BE MADE IN VIEW OF THE P ROVISIONS OF SEC.43B OF THE ACT. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ALOM EXTRUSIONS, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF INDUSTRIAL SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE ITA NO.339/MDS/2017 :- 3 -: (INDIA) PVT. LTD. REFERRED TO SUPRA, THE FINDINGS O F THE LD.CIT(A) STANDS CONFIRMED. 6. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.DR THAT THE ISSUE RAI SED IN THE GROUND NOS.3.1 & 3.2 WERE AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE LD.CIT (A) IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S.80IA(4) OF THE ACT BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEVELOPED AND OPERATED CONTAINER FREIGHT STATIO N WHICH IS AN INLAND PORT SPECIFIED U/S.80IA(4). AT THE TIME OF HEARING , IT WAS FAIRLY AGREED BY BOTH THE SIDES THAT THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED B Y THE DECISION OF CO- ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES O WN CASE FOR THE AY 2012-13 IN ITA NO.215/MDS/2016 DATED 01.08.2016 WHE REIN THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH HAS HELD AS FOLLOWS: 4. FROM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF IN COME TAX (APPEALS), IT IS EVIDENT THAT HE HAS ARRIVED AT THE ABOVE DECISION B Y RELYING ON THE CIRCULAR OF THE CBDT AND THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COU RT CITED SUPRA. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO PRODUCED BEFORE US THE PRESCRIBED CERTIFICATE FROM THE PORT TRUST DATED 28.03.2016. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DO NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS). 7. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.DR THAT THE ORDER OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH HAS NOT REACHED ITS FINALITY. 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ISSUE IN THE REVENUE APPEAL IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES O WN CASE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE, THE FINDINGS OF THE LD.CIT(A) STANDS CONFIRMED. ITA NO.339/MDS/2017 :- 4 -: 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON SEPTEMBER 26 , 2017, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ' ) (GEORGE MATHAN) % /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 1 /DATED: SEPTEMBER 26, 2017. TLN , )%23 43 /COPY TO: 1. ( /APPELLANT 4. 5 /CIT 2. )*( /RESPONDENT 5. 3 )%% /DR 3. 5 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. ' /GF