DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, Jaipur V. RAJASTHAN AVAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, Jaipur

ITA 486/JPR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3691 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (International Taxation) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 10-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Business expenditure; TDS
• Section: 43B; 139

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 486/JP/2018 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 6, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. M/S RAJASTHAN AWAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., LALKOTHI, TONK ROAD, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AABCA 3281 B VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI ANOOP SINGH (ADDL.CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 29/05/2018 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30/05/2018 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2018 OF CIT (A), JAIPUR FOR THE A.Y. 2014-15. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- (I) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DERECTING TO ALLOW TDS CREDIT OF RS. 14,16,550/- DEDUCTED BY THE BANK ON I NTEREST ON FDRS WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE SAID IN COME IS ITA NO. 486/JP/2018 DCIT VS. M/S RAJASTHAN AWAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. 2 NOT INCLUDABLE IN ASSESSEE'S TOTAL INCOME AND THAT THE TDS PAYMENT IS NOT FORM ASSESSEE'S INCOME. (II)WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE DI SALLOWANCE OF RS. 2,52,907/- MADE FOR DEPOSITING THE EMPLOYEES ' CONTRIBUTION TO PF ESI BEYOND THE PRESCRIBED TIME L IMIT PROVIDED IN THE RESPECTIVE ACTS. (III) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT TH E EMPLOYEES' CONTRIBUTION TO PF & ESI ARE GOVERNED BY THE PROVIS IONS OF SECTION 43B AND NOT BY SECTION 36(1)(VA) R.W.S. 2(2 4)(X) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. (IV) THE APPELLANT CRAVES ITS RIGHTS TO ADD, AMEND OR ALTER ANY OF THE GROUNDS ON OR BEFORE THE HEARING.' 2. NONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING DESPITE NOTICE OF HEARING WA S SENT THROUGH RPA. ACCORDINGLY, WE PROPOSED TO HERE AND DISPOSED OFF T HE APPEAL EX-PARTE. 3. GROUND NO. 1 IS REGARDING DISALLOWANCE OF TDS CR EDIT DEDUCTED IN RESPECT OF INTEREST ON FDR WHICH WAS ALLOWED THE LD . CIT(A). 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AS WELL AS CAREFUL PERU SED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED CREDIT OF TDS OF RS. 14,16,550/-. THE AO NOTED THAT THE CREDIT OF TDS IN QUESTION IS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF THE INTEREST ON FDR H OWEVER, NO SUCH INCOME HAS BEEN SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO PROPOSED ITA NO. 486/JP/2018 DCIT VS. M/S RAJASTHAN AWAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. 3 TO DISALLOW THE CLAIM OF TDS CREDIT. THE ASSESSEE C ONTENDED BEFORE THE AO THAT THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST OF FDR IS NOT AN INC OME CHARGEABLE TO TAX AND THEREFORE, THE TDS CREDIT OF RS. 14,16,550/ - CANNOT BE DENIED WHEN THE CORRESPONDING INTEREST INCOME IS NOT AN IN COME CHARGEABLE TO TAX. THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THE EXPLANATION OF THE A SSESSEE AND DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF TDS CREDIT IN QUESTION. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONSIDERED AND DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN PARA 2.3 A S UNDER:- 2.3 I HAVE PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER AND THE RECORDS OF THE APPELLANT. THIS ISSUE AROSE IN THE EARLIER YEARS ALSO AND WAS DECIDED BY THE HONBLE ITAT BOTH FOR A.Y. 2009-10 AND 2010-11 AND 2011-12 AND 2012-13 . THE R ELEVANT PORTIONS OF THE ORDER FOR A.Y. 2009-10 AND 2010-11 (ITA NOS. 247 & 248/JP/2014, 18 MARCH 2016) AND 2011-12 AND 2012- 13 (ITA NO. 391 & 392/JP/2016 A.Y. 2011-12 &2012-13, DATED 12.05.2017) IS REPRODUCED BELOW:- ITA NOS. 247 & 248/JP/2014, 18 MARCH 2016 4.3. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN OUR VIEW THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL HAD ALREADY BEEN ADJUDICATED IN THE 7 ITA NO . 247 & 248/JP/2014 RAJASTHAN AVAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE L TD. VS. DCIT MATTER OF CIT VS. RELCOM (2015) 62 TAXMANN.COM 190 (DELHI) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS UNDER :- 6. HAVING HEARD TH E SUBMISSIONS MADE ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND AFTER A PERUSAL T HE ORDERS PASSED BY THE CIT(A) AND THE ITAT, WE ARE OF OPINIO N THAT THE SAID ORDERS DO NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE AND WE RE WARRANTED AND JUSTIFIED IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. BEFORE WE PROCEED TO ELABORATE ON OUR REASONS FOR THE SAME , A PERUSAL OF SECTION 199 OF THE ACT IS NECESSARY. SECTION 199 READS AS ITA NO. 486/JP/2018 DCIT VS. M/S RAJASTHAN AWAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. 4 FOLLOWS: '199. CREDIT FOR TAX DEDUCTED. (1) ANY DED UCTION MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOREGOING PROVISIONS OF THIS CH APTER AND PAID TO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT SHALL BE TREATED AS A PAY MENT OF TAX ON BEHALF OF THE PERSON FROM WHOSE INCOME THE DEDUC TION WAS MADE, OR OF THE OWNER OF THE SECURITY, OR OF THE DE POSITOR OR OF THE OWNER OF PROPERTY OR OF THE UNIT-HOLDER, OR OF THE SHAREHOLDER, AS THE CASE MAY BE. (2) ANY SUM REFERRED TO IN SUB- SECTION (1A) OF SECTION 192 AND PAID TO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT S HALL BE TREATED AS THE TAX PAID ON BEHALF OF THE PERSON IN RESPECT OF WHOSE INCOME SUCH PAYMENT OF TAX HAS BEEN MADE. (3) THE BOARD MAY, FOR THE PURPOSES OF GIVING CREDI T IN RESPECT OF TAX DEDUCTED OR TAX PAID IN TERMS OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER, MAKE SUCH RULES AS MAY BE NECESSARY, INCLU DING THE RULES FOR THE PURPOSES OF GIVING CREDIT TO A PERSON OTHER THAN THOSE REFERRED TO IN SUBSECTION (1) AND SUB-SECTION (2) AND ALSO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR FOR WHICH SUCH CREDIT MAY BE GI VEN.' 7. THE REVENUE RELIES ON THE PHRASE 'SHALL BE TREAT ED AS A PAYMENT OF TAX ON BEHALF OF THE PERSON FROM WHOSE I NCOME THE DEDUCTION WAS MADE' TO CONTEND THAT THE ASSESSEE'S TDS CLAIM CANNOT BE BASED ON THE RECEIPTS OF M/S REPL. HOWEVE R, THE ASSESSEE FAIRLY ADMITTED THROUGHOUT THE PROCEEDINGS FOR ITS TDS CLAIM OF RS. 1,20,73,097/- THAT THE BENEFIT OF SUCH CLAIM HAS NOT BEEN AVAILED BY M/S. REPL. THEREFORE, THE REVENUE, HAVING ASSESSED M/S REPL'S INCOME IN RESPECT TO SUCH TDS C LAIM CANNOT NOW DENY THE ASSESSEE'S CLAIM ON THE MERE TECHNICAL GROUND THAT THE INCOME IN RESPECT OF THE SAID TDS CLAIM WAS NOT THAT OF THE ASSESSEE, GIVEN THAT M/S RELCOM (THE ASSESSEE) AND M/S REPL ARE SISTER CONCERNS AND M/S REPL HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJ ECTION WITH REGARD TO THE ASSESSEE'S TDS CLAIM OF RS. 1,20,73,0 97/-. 8. THIS COURT'S REASONING IS SUPPORTED BY A RULING OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THE ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN CIT V. BH OORATNAM & CO. [2013] 357 ITR 396/216 TAXMAN 6/29 TAXMANN.COM 275 WHERE THE COURT NOTED AS FOLLOWS: ITA NO. 486/JP/2018 DCIT VS. M/S RAJASTHAN AWAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. 5 'IN OUR VIEW, THE CIT (APPEALS) AND THE TRIBUNAL HA VE RIGHTLY HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO THE CREDIT OF THE TDS MENTIONED IN THE TDS CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY THE CONTRACTOR, WHET HER THE SAID CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE JOINT VENT URE OR IN THE NAME OF A DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. THEY HA VE CONSIDERED THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 12-03-2 003 AMONG THE PARTIES TO THE JOINT VENTURE AND HELD THAT CRED IT 8 ITA NO. 247 & 248/JP/2014 RAJASTHAN AVAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. VS. DCIT FOR TDS CERTIFICATES CANNOT BE DENIED TO THE A SSESSEE WHILE ASSESSING THE CONTRACT RECEIPTS MENTIONED IN THE SA ID CERTIFICATES AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE INCOME SHOWN IN THE TDS CERTIFICATES HAS EITHER TO BE TAXED IN THE HANDS OF THE JOINT VENTURE OR IN THE HANDS OF THE INDIVIDUAL CO-JOINT VENTURER. AS THE JOINT VENTURE HAS NOT FILED RETURN OF INCOME AND CL AIMED CREDIT FOR TDS CERTIFICATES AND THE TDS CERTIFICATES HAVE NOT BEEN DOUBTED, CREDIT HAS TO BE GRANTED TO THE TDS MENTIONED THERE IN FOR THE ASSESSEE. THE REVENUE CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO RETAIN T AX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE WITHOUT CREDIT BEING AVAILABLE TO ANYBODY . IF CREDIT OF TAX IS NOT ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE, AND THE JOINT V ENTURE HAS NOT FILED A RETURN OF INCOME, THEN CREDIT OF THE TDS CA NNOT BE TAKEN BY ANYBODY. THIS IS NOT THE SPIRIT AND INTENTION OF LAW.'(EMPHASIS SUPPLIED) 9. AT THIS STAGE, IT IS ALSO RELEVANT TO NOTE THE P ROVISIONS OF RULE 37BA OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962, WHICH ENVISIONS GRANT OF TDS CREDIT TO ENTITIES OTHER THAN THE DEDUCTEE (HER EIN, M/S REPL). WE MUST CLARIFY THAT WE ARE NOT OBLIVIOUS OF THE FA CT THAT RULE 37BA IS NOT DIRECTLY APPLICABLE IN THE FACTS OF THI S CASE. THE RELIANCE PLACED ON RULE 37BA IS MERELY TO DEMONSTRA TE THAT IN NOT ALL CIRCUMSTANCES IS TDS CREDIT GIVEN TO THE DEDUCT EE. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE AMOUNT WAS DEPOSITED AS FDR S BY THE ASSESSEE ON BEHALF OF STATE OF RAJASTHAN WITH THE B ANK OF RAJASTHAN AND ON THE FDRS DEPOSIT THE INTEREST HAS BEEN ACCRUED . THE TDS WAS DEDUCTED BY THE BANK ON THE INTEREST ACCRUED ON THE FDRS. IN OUR VIEW, THE REVENUE IS TAKING THE HY PER TECHNICAL ITA NO. 486/JP/2018 DCIT VS. M/S RAJASTHAN AWAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. 6 PLEA OF NOT RETURNING THE TDS TO THE ASSESSEE ON TH E PRETEXT THAT THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN DEPOSITED WITH THE BANK ON BEHA LF OF STATE OF RAJASTHAN. SINCE THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN IS NOT A TAXABLE ENTITY, THEREFORE, REFUND OF TDS CANNOT BE GIVEN TO THE STA TE OF RAJASTHAN. IT IS NOT DISPUTED THAT THE ASSESSEE AFT ER REALIZING THE INTEREST INCOME FROM THE BANK HAS GIVEN BACK THE AM OUNT TO THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN . SIMILARLY IT IS ALSO UNDISPUTE D THAT THE REFUND OF TDS HAS NOT BEEN CLAIMED BY THE THE STATE OF RAJ ASTHAN AND IS ONLY CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE BEING THE NODAL AGENCY OF THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN FOR THIS PROJECT . IN OUR VIEW, NO PRE JUDICE WILL BE CAUSED TO ANY PERSON IF THE TDS IS REFUNDED TO THE ASSESSEE BEING THE NODAL AGENCY WITH THE UNDERTAKING TO RETU RN THE AMOUNT TO THE STATE OF 9 ITA NO. 247 & 248/JP/2014 RAJASTHAN AVAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. VS. DCIT RAJASTHAN . IN VIEW OF THEREOF AND ALSO IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT REFERRED H EREINABOVE, THE TDS DEDUCTED BY THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT IS DI RECTED TO BE PAID TO THE ASSESSEE AND WE ACCORDINGLY HOLD THE SAME. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED. 5. SIMILAR GROUND IS RAISED IN THE ASSESSEES APPEA L IN ITA NO. 248/JP/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. SINCE WE HAVE DECIDED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO. 247/JP/201 4 IN ITS FAVOUR, ON THE SAME REASONING WE DECIDE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11 IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSE SSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ITA NO. 391& 392/JP/2016 A.Y. 2011-12 & 2012-13 2.4 THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASE ARE PARI MATERIA TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE BEFORE THE COORDINATE BENCH IN RESPECT OF ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.YS 2009-10 AND 2010-11. THE REVENUE HAS NOT BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE ANY CONTRARY AUTHORITY ON THE SAID ISSUE. HENCE, WE DO NOT SEE A REASON TO DEVIATE FROM THE V IEW TAKEN BY THE COORDINATE BENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. ITA NO. 486/JP/2018 DCIT VS. M/S RAJASTHAN AWAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. 7 2.5 UNDISPUTEDLY, THE INTEREST INCOME HAS NOT BEEN BROUGHT TO TAX BY THE REVENUE ACCEPTING THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION THAT THE RECEIPT OF FUNDS AND INTEREST THEREON IS IN THE FUD ICIARY CAPACITY ON BEHALF OF THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN. THE STATE OF R AJASTHAN BEING NOT A TAXABLE ENTITY, THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY TDS A T FIRST PLACE. FOR REASONS BEST KNOWN TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE BANK , THE TDS HAS BEEN DEDUCTED. GIVEN THAT INTEREST INCOME IS NO T TAXABLE EITHER IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE OR THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN, THE TDS HAS TO BE REFUNDED. SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS ACTIN G AS THE NODAL AGENCY AND ALL FUNDS HAVE BEEN ROUTED THROUGH IT, T HE REFUND OF TDS HAS TO BE ROUTED THROUGH IT TO THE STATE OF RAJ ASTHAN. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE REVENUE TO REFUND THE TD S OF RS. 38440/- TO THE ASSESSEE WITH THE UNDERTAKING TO RET URN THE SAID AMOUNT TO THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN. ITA NO. 392/JP/2016 ITA NO. 391 & 392/JP/2016 RAJAS THAN AVAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD VS ACIT 8 2.6 IN ITA NO. 392/JP/2016, THE FACTS ARE PARI-MATERIA TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN ABOVE APPEAL IN ITA NO. 391/JP/2016. ACCORDINGLY, OUR FINDINGS A ND DIRECTIONS CONTAINED THEREIN SHALL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS TO T HIS APPEAL AS WELL. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE A RE ALLOWED. IN VIEW OF THE DECISIONS AS ABOVE THE GROUND OF APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. THUS, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED T HE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING DECISIONS OF COORDINATE BENCH ES OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 200 9-10 TO 2012-13. THERE IS NO DENIAL OF THE FACT THAT THE INTEREST IN COME ON WHICH THE TDS IN QUESTION WAS DEDUCTED BY THE BANK WAS IN RESPECT OF THE FUNDS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HUDCO IN THE FIDUCIAR Y CAPACITY ON ITA NO. 486/JP/2018 DCIT VS. M/S RAJASTHAN AWAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. 8 BEHALF OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT FOR DISBURSEMENT. TH E FACT IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ARE SAME AS IT WAS FOR THE EARL IER ASSESSMENT YEAR FOLLOWED BY THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, IN VIEW OF THE FINDINGS OF COORDINATE BENCHES OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES O WN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 TO 2012-13, WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR OR ILLEGALITY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) QUA THIS ISSUE. 5. GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 ARE REGARDING DISALLOWANCE M ADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF PF AND ESI BEYOND THE PRESCRIBED TIME LIMIT PROVIDED IN THE RESPECTIVE ACTS WHICH WAS ALLOWED BY THE LD. CI T(A). 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND CAREFULLY PERUSED T HE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONSIDERED TH IS ISSUE IN PARA 3.3 AS UNDER:- 3.3 I HAVE PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE ASS ESSMENT ORDER AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT. ADMITTEDLY, C ONTRIBUTION TO PF & ESI HAS BEEN PAID BY THE APPELLANT, IN ALL INS TANCES, BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME U/S 139 (1). THIS FACT IS THEREFORE, NOT IN DISPUTE. RELIANCE IS PLACED ON TH E RELEVANT JUDGMENTS ON THIS ISSUE OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND THE APEX COURT AS LISTED BELOW:- CIT VS. VINAY CEMENTS [213 CTR 268 (SC) CIT VS. STATE BANK OF BIKANER & JAIPUR [(2014) 43 T AXMANN. CORN 411 (RAJ)]: HELD '23. THUS, IT IS VIEWED THAT WHERE THE PF AND/ OR EPF, CPF, GPF ETC., ITA NO. 486/JP/2018 DCIT VS. M/S RAJASTHAN AWAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. 9 IF PAID AFTER THE DUE DATE UNDER RESPECTIVE ACT BUT BEFORE FILING OF THE RETURN OF INCOME UNDER SECTION 139(1), CANNO T BE DISALLOWED UNDER SECTION 438 OR UNDER SECTION 36(I) (VA) OF THE IT ACT.' CIT VS. UDAIPUR DUGDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD. 2 65 CTR (RAJ.) 59: SECTION 36(I)(VA) AND 438 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 19 61 - BUSINESS EXPENDITURE - ASSESSEE ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF CONTRI BUTION TO ESI AND PF AS THE SAME HAS BEEN DEPOSITED PRIOR TO THE FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME U/S 139(1). CIT VS. JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. 265 CTR (RA J.) 62: SECTION 36(L)(VA) AND 438 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 19 61 - BUSINESS EXPENDITURE - DISALLOWANCE - ASSESSEE ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION IN RE SPECT OF PAYMENT FOR GPF, CPF AND ESI AS THE SAME HAS BEEN D EPOSITED PRIOR TO THE FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME U/S 139(1). ALOM EXTRASIONS (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC): BUSINESS EXPENDITURE-DEDUCTION ON ACTUAL PAYMENT-CO NTRIBUTION TO PROVIDENT FUND- EXISTING PROVISION CREATING DIF FICULTIES- AMENDMENT TO REMOVE DIFFICULTY-HAS RETROSPECTIVE EF FECT- FINANCE ACT, 2003, MAKING AMENDMENT BUT AS IF WITH EFFECT FROM APRIL 1, 2004-TO BE READ AS HAVING RETROSPECTI VE EFFECT FROM APRIL 1,1988-INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, S. 438. M/S SUPERSONIC TURNER PVT. LTD VS. ACIT [ITA NO. 85 3/JP/2012]: DCIT VS. ROYAL INDIA JEWELLERY MANUFACTURING PRIVAT E LIMITED [ITA NO.582/JP/2008 DATED 13/02/2009]: IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND JUDGMENTS RELIED ON, THE C LAIM OF THE APPELLANT IS ALLOWABLE. ACCORDINGLY, THIS DISALLOWA NCE MADE BY THE ITA NO. 486/JP/2018 DCIT VS. M/S RAJASTHAN AWAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. 10 ASSESSING OFFICER IS, DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. THIS GROUND IS ALLOWED. FURTHER, AS IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE DECISIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. STATE BANK OF BIKANER & JAIPUR 43 TAXMANN.COM 411 AS WELL AS IN CASE OF CIT VS. JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. 265 CTR 62. ACCORDINGLY, IN VIEW OF THE BINDING PRECEDENT OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR OR ILLEGALITY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD . CIT(A) QUA THIS ISSUE. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30/05/2018. SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO FOT; IKY JKO (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (VIJAY PAL RAO) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 30/05/2018. * SANTOSH. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- M/S RAJASTHAN AWAS VIKAS & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 486/JP/2018} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR