9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 78X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that the case at hand was covered against the revenue by the decision of Marubeni India (P) Ltd. V/s. CIT ( 2006 (6) TMI 143 - ITAT DELHI-A) and Kanoi Paper & Industries Ltd. V/s. JCIT (2001 (5) TMI 139 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E) and especially in view of this position, the Tribunal upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by observing that the payment of contribution although made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ree appeals in respect of assessment years 2005-06 to 2007-08 pertains to deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') in respect of the provident fund contribution made by the assessee beyond the period specified in para 38 of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952. The question of law reads as under:- Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. However, this contribution was made belatedly. The payment was made beyond due date but within the grace period of five days. The assessee claimed deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. In the course of the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer made addition to the total income of the employees contribution to the provident fund on account of delay in payment of the contribution ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Kumar for the appellant. According to him, the order of the Assessing Officer was correct and ought to have been sustained. We are unable to agree. Before the Tribunal, we find that the department's representative fairly conceded that the case at hand was covered against the revenue by the decision of Marubeni India (P) Ltd. V/s. CIT (101 ITD 437 Delhi) and Kanoi Paper Industries Ltd. V/s. J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
