9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 1648 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of employees contribution to PF and ESI invoking provisions of Section 2(24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) - HELD THAT - In view of a series of decisions of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in favour of the assessee and further Hon ble Supreme Court in case of PCIT vs. Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd. 2017 (7) TMI 1087 - SC ORDER has dismissed the SLP filed by the Department this issue is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Hence, disallowances/additions made by the AO on account of employees contribution to PF ESI are deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues: Disallowance of employees' contribution to PF and ESI after due date of payment but within due date of filing return.
Analysis: 1. The appeals were against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15, challenging the disallowance of employees' contribution to PF and ESI. 2. The main issue was the disallowance of contributions within the due date of filing return but after the due date of payment as per PF & ESI Acts. 3. The Tribunal noted that various decisions of the jurisdictional High Court favored the assessee, including cases like CIT vs. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur and CIT vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. 4. The CIT(A) misunderstood a decision in the case of PCIT vs. Rajasthan Renewable Energy Corporation Limited, leading to the disallowance being sustained. 5. The High Court decisions supported the assessee, emphasizing that normal expenditure for employee welfare is allowable under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. 6. The High Court clarified the typographical error in the decision, stating that if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the department, they can recover the amount. 7. Considering the series of favorable decisions for the assessee and the Supreme Court's dismissal of the SLP filed by the department, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting the disallowances/additions made by the AO. 8. Consequently, both appeals of the assessee were allowed, and the order was pronounced on 08/03/2019.
|
