9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Deletion of addition under section 43B for provident fund contribution. 2. Reduction of excess depreciation for section 115J computation. 3. Exclusion of excise duty and sales-tax from turnover for section 80HHC. Issue 1: Deletion of addition under section 43B for provident fund contribution: The Revenue contested the CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition made under section 43B regarding provident fund contribution. The Revenue relied on the Calcutta High Court decision stating that provident fund contribution must be paid within 15 days from the last day of the month. However, the Tribunal, citing a Bangalore Bench decision, held that contributions paid within the grace period should be considered paid within the prescribed time. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that contributions for the last month could be paid by the 15th of the next month. The Tribunal also noted that the provision of section 43B pertains to provident fund contributions, not administrative charges, supporting the CIT(A)'s deletion of the disallowance. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal on this ground failed. Issue 2: Reduction of excess depreciation for section 115J computation: The Revenue objected to the CIT(A)'s directive to reduce the excess depreciation added for section 115J computation. The Revenue cited a Madhya Pradesh High Court decision to argue that the profit calculated in accordance with the Companies Act should not be altered. The Tribunal agreed that the profit as per the Companies Act should be considered for section 115J but noted a lack of specific findings on how the profit was determined. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal remanded the issue to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision based on the profit calculated as per the relevant provisions. The Tribunal directed a proper opportunity for the assessee to be heard in this regard. Issue 3: Exclusion of excise duty and sales-tax from turnover for section 80HHC: The Revenue raised a concern about the exclusion of excise duty and sales-tax from the total turnover for section 80HHC. The Revenue argued, based on a Supreme Court decision, that since the assessee maintained accounts on a mercantile system, both excise duty and sales-tax should be included in turnover for section 80HHC. However, the assessee relied on a Bombay High Court decision, contending that excise duty and sales-tax, lacking profit elements, should not be part of the total turnover for section 80HHC. The Tribunal found the Supreme Court decision cited by the Revenue distinguishable on facts and favored the assessee based on the Bombay High Court decision. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision on this matter. In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the Revenue's appeal for statistical purposes, maintaining the decisions on the issues discussed above.
|
