2018 (11) TMI 508 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of excess depreciation on vehicle used on hire - substantiate the claim - Held that - We found that the assessee could not substantiate that the vehicle was used for the purpose of hire either before the AO or before the CIT(A). Therefore, we found that the CIT(A) after considering the factual aspects has confirmed the addition which we are not inclined to interfere and uphold the same. This ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Disallowance on account of late payment of EPF and ESI contribution - due date of filing of the return u/s.139(1) - addition made on the ground that the employees contribution to EPF & ESI were not deposited within the time prescribed under the P.F.Act. - Held that - We find that no disallowance can be made for deduction of the same u/s.36(1)(va) r.w.s.2(24)(x) of the Act in view of the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd. 2017 (7) TMI 1087 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA . We find in the instant case, it is not in dispute that the contribution to EPF and ESI was deposited by the assessee before due date of filing the return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of excess depreciation on vehicle used on hire.
2. Disallowance on account of late payment of EPF and ESI contribution.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Disallowance of Excess Depreciation on Vehicle Used on Hire
The appeal was filed against the CIT(A)'s order for the assessment year 2014-2015. The assessee failed to appear during the hearing, citing a strike of the Bar Council of Odisha as the reason. The Tribunal rejected the adjournment petition and proceeded to consider the appeal based on the facts and the Revenue's submissions. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee included challenges to the disallowance of depreciation and EPF/ESI contributions. The AO had assessed the total income at a higher amount, making additions for excess depreciation, income received, and late EPF/ESI payments. The CIT(A) partially allowed the appeal, deleting the addition for suppression of gross receipts but confirming the depreciation and EPF/ESI contributions. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) upheld the addition of excess depreciation as the assessee could not prove that the commercial vehicle was used for hire, as required for higher depreciation rates. The decision cited relevant case law and confirmed the AO's addition of depreciation. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the appeal on this ground.

Issue 2: Disallowance on Account of Late Payment of EPF and ESI Contribution
Regarding the late payment of EPF and ESI contributions, the Tribunal found that the assessee had deposited the amounts before the due date of filing the return under section 139(1) of the Act. The AO disallowed the deductions under section 36(1)(va) based on the timing of the contributions. However, the Tribunal referred to a Supreme Court decision that contributions made before the due date of filing returns cannot be disallowed. Following this precedent, the Tribunal directed the AO to delete the addition of employees' EPF and ESI contributions. Consequently, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal on this ground. The order was pronounced on 23/10/2018, with the appeal being partly allowed.

This analysis provides a detailed overview of the issues raised in the appeal, the arguments presented, the decisions made by the CIT(A) and the Tribunal, and the legal principles applied to reach the final judgment.