2015 (12) TMI 623 - HC - Income Tax

Dealership deposit disallowed - ITAT deleted the addition - Held that - The Tribunal scrutinized the record and found that apart from giving the particulars of cheque and demand draft the assesse has also furnished photocopy of Vouchers and bank statement and from these records it is found that these amounts were credited through bank transactions. It is also found in addition thereto entries of the withdrawn and deposits are available in the bank s passbook and other bank documents filed by the assessee. That being so it is reasonable finding of facts, arrived at on due appreciation of the evidence on records and, therefore, no error is committed by the tribunal warranting reconsideration, accordingly we find no ground to go into this question.- Decided against revenue Late deposit of provident fund - ITAT deleted the addition - Held that - Amount deposit with the statutory provident fund authority is within the period stipulated including the grace period, therefore, the reason for disallowance is not permissible and such disallowance has been interfered with. It is found by the learned tribunal that for the sum of ₹ 2,40,980 as the same was not deposited in time, no relief can be granted, but for the remaining amount deposited with the provident fund in time, as per law, the benefit is extended. This is also finding of fact based on due appreciation of the evidence and the material available on record and therefore we find no substantial question of law arising for consideration in this appeal. - Decided against revenue

Summary

Issues:
1. Tenability of an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act.
2. Deletion of dealership deposit of Rs. 15,00,000 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
3. Deletion of provident fund contribution after the due date.

Analysis:
1. The High Court addressed the revenue's appeal questioning the tenability of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's order dated 29.12.2009. The case involved an assessee engaged in the manufacturing of beverages and liquors. The total income assessed was Rs. 4,48,77,110 after scrutiny under Section 143(3). The appeal primarily focused on the deletion of Rs. 15,00,000 related to dealership deposit and the provident fund contribution deposited after the due date. The tribunal's interference with these deletions was challenged in the appeal.

2. Regarding the deletion of Rs. 15,00,000 dealership deposit, the Assessing Officer and Commissioner Appeal disallowed the amount due to lack of creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions. However, the tribunal found evidence supporting the deposits made by the entities involved. The assesse provided cheque details, demand drafts, vouchers, and bank statements to substantiate the transactions. The tribunal's decision was based on a thorough examination of the evidence, concluding that the deposits were genuine. Therefore, the High Court upheld the tribunal's decision, stating no error was committed in allowing the deletion of the amount.

3. In the case of the provident fund contribution deposited after the due date, the tribunal found that the amount deposited within the stipulated period, including the grace period, should not be disallowed. However, for the sum not deposited on time, relief was not granted. The tribunal's decision was supported by the evidence and material on record, indicating no substantial question of law for consideration. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal, finding no grounds for interference with the tribunal's decision on the provident fund contributions.

In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's decisions regarding the dealership deposit and provident fund contributions, emphasizing the importance of evidence and factual findings in tax assessment matters.