2021 (4) TMI 211 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of contribution made to the unapproved gratuity fund - Whether assessee had applied for approval of gratuity fund as held by CIT-A? - as per revenue no supporting evidence for grant of approval was furnished by the assessee as per the requirement of section 36(1)(v) of the Act during the assessment proceedings and during appellate proceedings as well - HELD THAT - As pointed out by the Ld. counsel Under section 36(1)(v) of the Act, any provision or contribution made to an approved gratuity fund is allowable provided that it should be approved by the Chief Commissioner of the of the Income Tax. The copy of corrigendum dated 3.7.2020 issued by the CIT-1, Chandigarh establishes the fact that the assessee had applied for approval of the said scheme, which was granted by the authority concerned on 28.2.2012. The Revenue did not dispute the contents of the said corrigendum. Hence, in our considered view, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition made by the AO, wrongly holding that the scheme was not approved by the concerned authority. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). Disallowance of premium paid towards leave encashment scheme - assessee made payment by creating LIC based fund - AO made addition of the said amount on the ground that no actual payment was made to any employee - HELD THAT - The assessee has made the said payment in order to secure the plan for payment of leave encashment at the time of retirement of its employees on attaining the age of superannuation as per the terms and conditions of the plan. We further notice that the Ld. CIT(A) has already decided the identical issue in favour of the assessee in assessee's appeal for the assessment year 2013-14 and the department did not challenge the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). We further notice that the Ld. CIT(A) has decided the identical issue in favour of the assessee in assessee's appeal for the assessment year 2014-15. We further notice that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the order of the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the cases of the H.P. State Industrial Corporation Ltd. 2015 (8) TMI 123 - ITAT CHANDIGARH Since, the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) are in accordance with the decision of the coordinate Bench discussed above, we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A), Hence, we uphold the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss this ground of appeal of the Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of contribution to unapproved provident fund.
2. Disallowance of leave salary contribution.

Issue 1: Disallowance of contribution to unapproved provident fund:
The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order dismissing their appeal against the assessment order for the year 2012-13, which included additions on account of contributions to an unapproved provident fund and leave salary. The Revenue challenged the CIT(A)'s decision on various grounds, including the lack of supporting evidence for the approval of the gratuity fund and the non-payment of leave salary to employees. The Departmental Representative argued that the CIT(A) wrongly deleted the additions. However, the assessee's counsel contended that the CIT(A) correctly followed previous orders and that the contributions were approved. The tribunal found that the premium for the gratuity scheme was approved by the competent authority, as evidenced by a corrigendum, and upheld the CIT(A)'s decision. The tribunal also noted that the CIT(A) had previously ruled in favor of the assessee in similar cases. Therefore, the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed regarding this issue.

Issue 2: Disallowance of leave salary contribution:
Regarding the disallowance of leave salary contribution, the tribunal observed that the assessee had made payments to LIC for a leave encashment plan, which the AO disallowed due to the absence of direct payments to employees. However, the CIT(A) allowed this ground of appeal, considering the purpose of the payment to secure the leave encashment plan for employees' retirement. The tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had previously ruled in favor of the assessee in similar cases for other assessment years, and the issue was also supported by a decision of a co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal. As the findings of the CIT(A) were in line with previous decisions and the terms of the plan, the tribunal upheld the decision and dismissed the Revenue's appeal for the assessment year 2012-13.

In conclusion, the tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions to delete the additions related to the unapproved provident fund contribution and leave salary contribution, as they were found to be in accordance with the law and supported by previous rulings and approvals. The appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012-13 was dismissed.