9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 623X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence on records and, therefore, no error is committed by the tribunal warranting reconsideration, accordingly we find no ground to go into this question.- Decided against revenue Late deposit of provident fund - ITAT deleted the addition - Held that:- Amount deposit with the statutory provident fund authority is within the period stipulated including the grace period, therefore, the reason for disallowance is not permissible and such disallowance has been interfered with. It is found by the learned tribunal that for the sum of ₹ 2,40,980 as the same was not deposited in time, no relief can be granted, but for the remaining amount deposited with the provident fund in time, as per law, the benefit is extended. This is also finding of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment Officer and the Commissioner Appeal, Shri Lal tried to indicate that for deletion of ₹ 15,00,000/- as the dealers who had made the deposit were not found to be creditworthy and as the genuineness of the transactions is not established, concurrent findings were recorded by both the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner Appeal and in a perverse manner the tribunal has interfered in this assessment. Accordingly it is stated that interference with assessment pertaining to deletion, on this count an error is committed by the tribunal. Similarly in the matter of depositing the provident fund dues with the statutory provident fund authorities it is argued that as amount was not deposited in time, the same amounts to violation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sactions. It is also found in addition thereto entries of the withdrawn and deposits are available in the bank s passbook and other bank documents filed by the assesse. That being so it is reasonable finding of facts, arrived at on due appreciation of the evidence on records and, therefore, no error is committed by the tribunal warranting reconsideration, accordingly we find no ground to go into this question. As far as second ground is concerned it pertains to reducing the sum of ₹ 6,14 ,986/- to ₹ 2,40,980/- being the late deposit of provident fund and not depositing the provident fund collected without assigning any reason after the statutory due date with the provident fund authority. From para 10 onwards learned tribu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
