9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 853X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT(Appeals) erred in law in confirming the disallowance of contribution to the gratuity fund amounting to Rs. 4,00,438/- which was pending for approval, without appreciating the fact that the fund was approved however due to change in name of the fund, the revised petition for approval had been filed with the Commission. 2. That on the facts an in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in not appreciating the fact that the appellant ad filed the petitions for granting of approval and conducted regular follow-ups in connection with the approval process, in spite of which no formal approval had been granted to the appellant and has thus penalized the appellant without any violations being committed. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add to and/or amend, alter, modify or rescind the grounds hereinabove before or at the hearing of the appeal. Additional ground: "The appellant company begs to take the following additional grounds of appeal in the subject appeal, which do not involve any fresh investigation of facts, but pertains to question of law and therefore may please be admitted and adjudicated upon based on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... name of assessee was VAI Engineering & Automation (P) Ltd. which was re-named as VAI Engineering and Automation (P) Ltd. vide order dated 14.08.2003 by ROC. 6. The assessee (VAI (P) Ltd) was maintaining a gratuity fund for its employees which was approved by Ld. CIT vide order dated 27.01.2003 with effect from 01.01.1997. The assessee in the year under consideration contributed a sum of Rs.4,00,438/- towards the gratuity fund and claimed the deduction in the profit and loss account but offered the same to tax in the computation of income. 7. However, assessee during the course of assessment proceedings claimed the deduction for the amount contributed to the gratuity fund but the same was disallowed by the AO without adducing any reason and accordingly, same was added to the total income of assessee. 8. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee before Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the amount contributed to gratuity fund was offered to tax in the computation of income inadvertently. But during the course of assessment proceedings, the claim of expenditure was made before the AO. But the claim of it was rejected by the AO without adducing any reasons there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee if Ld. CIT approved the change made in the Deed of Gratuity Fund subsequently. In this regard Ld. DR did not raise any objection if the matter be restored back to the file of AO. 11. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. In the case before us the deduction was claimed by assessee during the assessment proceedings for the amount contributed towards the gratuity fund but Authorities Below denied to entertain the claim of assessee for the reason as discussed above. However, we find that in the assessee's own case in ITA No.1944/Kol/2013 (supra) matter was restored back to the file of AO for fresh verification of the case. For the sake of clarity, the relevant operative portion of this order is reproduced below:- 2. We have heard Shri R.S. Biswas, Id. ClT, D.R. and Ms. Akshata Mehta, Id. counsel for the assessee. The first appellate authority in his order at para 2.3 observed as follows:- "2.3. I have carefully considered the above observation of the assessing officer and also the submission of the Ld. AIR. During the course of the appellate proceedings, the Ld. AIR has explained that the gratuity fund of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purpose, these grounds of appeal are allowed". 3. We do not find any infirmity in this order of the first appellate authority. The Id. CIT(Appeals) has directed the Assessing Officer to verify the facts and pass necessary consequential orders. The directions are specific. Under these circumstances, we see no reason to interfere with the same." Respectfully following the same, we remit the appeal to the file of AO for fresh verification in terms of our above direction and in accordance with the law. Hence, this ground of assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purpose. Now coming to the additional grounds of appeal: 12. The issue raised in additional ground is that assessee is entitled for deduction of Rs.7,57,713/- and Rs.12,61,664/- being 1/5th of the restructuring expenses of Rs.37,88,563/- and Rs.63,08,319/- respectively. The assessee in its additional ground sought the deduction of restructuring expenses for Rs.7,57,713/- and Rs. 12,51,664/- being 1/5th of total restricting expense in view of the order of Hon'ble Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA No. 874/Kol/2007 for A.Y 2002-03 dated 28.09.2007. At the threshold it is important to understand the history of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
