9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 315X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same are treated as paid on or before the due date as per explanation attached to section 36(1)(va) of the Act - Decided against Revenue. - I.T.A. No.3102/Ahd/2010, CO No.10/Ahd/2014 - - - Dated:- 5-2-2014 - Shri N. S. Saini And Shri Kul Bharat,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri N.B. Shah, A.R. For the Respondent : Shri O. P. Batheja, Sr. D. R. ORDER Per Shri Kul Bharat, Judicial Member : The Revenue and the Assessee have filed the appeal and the Cross Objection respectively against the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-VIII, Ahmedabad ('CIT(A)' for short) dated 25/08/2010 pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2003-04. 2. At the outset, ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that he does not wish to press th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, prayed that the order of the Learned CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer may be restored to the above extent. 3.1. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was reopened and the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") r.w.s. 147 of the I.T.Act was passed by the AO vide order dated 24/12/2008. While framing the assessment, the AO made addition(s) on account of interest attributable to interest-free advances amounting to Rs.9,94,651/- and non-payment of the contribution of Employees' contribution towards PF amounting to Rs.77,410/-. Against this, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A), who after considering the submissions partly allowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artmental Representative could not point out any specific error in the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals). The Learned Departmental Representative could not point out how the advance given to Karnataka Electricity Board for electric supply, advance given for purchase of machinery and advance rent paid were not business advances of the assessee. In absence of any such material brought on record, we confirm the finding of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) that the above advances were for the business purpose of the assessee and no disallowance of interest in respect of such interest free business advances can legally be made. Further, in respect of advance of Rs.64,66,410/- to Karnataka Jewels Ltd., no erro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (supra), we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A), the same is hereby upheld. Thus, these grounds of Revenue's appeal are rejected. 6. Ground Nos.2.1 2.2 are against the deletion of addition of Rs.77,410/- made on account of delayed payment of employees' contribution towards PF account. The ld.Sr.DR supported the order of the AO, whereas the ld.counsel for the assessee supported the order of the ld.CIT(A) and submitted that the employees' contribution was made within the grace period provided by the law. 7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the ld.CIT(A) has given a finding on fact that the assessee had made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
