"C/TAXAP/137/2019 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 137 of 2019 ============================================= TALENT ANYWHERE SERVICES PVT. LTD. Versus DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1)(1) ============================================= Appearance: JENIL M SHAH(7840) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ============================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C. RAO Date : 18/06/2019 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) 1. This Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act, 1961”) is at the instance of the Assessee and is directed against the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad “D” Bench dated 10.07.2018 in ITA No.1327/Ahd/2018 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The following questions have been proposed as the substantial questions of law in the memorandum of the tax appeal : “(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the disallowance of Rs.51,06,031/- towards Employees Contribution to PF and Rs.2,82,708/- towards Employees contribution to ESIC in spite of the fact that the same were deposited with the relevant fund before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act? (ii) If the answer to the above question is in affirmative, whether the Tribunal was right in conforming the disallowance for all the months in spite of the fact that Page 1 of 2 C/TAXAP/137/2019 ORDER for some of the months such contribution to PF as well as ESIC was within the due date as prescribed u/s 36(1) (va) if such due date is reckoned from the end of the month in which the salaries are paid?” 3. The Tribunal in its impugned order has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 265 CTR 64 and has observed as under : “4. Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowance after placing reliance on the decision of jurisdictional high court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 265 CTR 65. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record carefully. We have noticed that the assessee has not deposited the contribution received from the employees within the due dates as prescribed under the Provident Fund Act & ESIC. We consider that that Hon’ble jurisdictional High court in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 265 CTR 64 has held that when the employer has not credited the sum received by it as employees contribution to employees account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in explanation to section 36(i)(va) the assessee shall not be entitled to deduction. In view of the above facts and the judicial findings, we uphold the decision of Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.” 4. The issue is squarely covered by the aforesaid decision of this Court. The issue is now pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 5. In view of the above, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. (J. B. PARDIWALA, J) (A. C. RAO, J) Dolly Page 2 of 2 "
Mehul