9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1476X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome booked in F.Y. 2015-16”. In our considered opinion, in such circumstances no addition can be made. In the result, this ground of appeal is in favour of the assessee. Late payment of employees’ contributions of provident fund and ESIC by invoking Section 36(1)(va) - Held that:- Since assesses had no deposited said contribution in respective fund account on date as prescribed in Explanation to section 36(1)(va), disallowance made by Assessing Officer was just and proper. See CIT vs Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [2014 (1) TMI 502 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - Decided against assessee. - ITA No.2668/Ahd/2015 - - - Dated:- 21-12-2017 - SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s.244A in the amount of refund credited to the bank account. ( c) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- Gandhinagar grossly erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the impugned addition in utter disregard to the fact that the appellant assessee was not provided with copy of the intimation u/s.143(1) or the break-up of the refund credited to its bank account for A.Y.2009-10 and that in spite of the request made to the Assessing Officer as well as the Income Tax Authority at Central Processing Unit at Bangalore, no break-up of the Income Tax Refund and amount of interest thereon was furnished to the assessee by the department. ( d) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- Gandhinagar grossly err ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rubber Works 326 ITR 415 (P H)(2010) d) Precision Products vs. ACIT (ITA No.4/Ahd/2011)(Ahd)(2012) e) Sai Consulting Engineers (P) Limited. V. DCIT Circle 8, Abd. ITA No. 2262/Ahd/2007 f) Sabari Enterprises 298 ITR 141 (Kar) g) George Williamson 284 ITR 619 (Gau) h) Sunil Goel v. ACIT 118 TTJ (Del) 415 i) CIT v. P.M. Electronics Limited. 15 DTR 258 (Delhi High Court) j) CIT v. AIMIL Limited Ors. (2010) 35 DTR (Del) 68 (Delhi High Court) k) CIT v. ANZ Information Technology 318 ITR 123 (Karnataka) I) Additional CIT v. Vestas RRB India Limited (2005) 93 TTJ (Del) 144 m) CIT v. Kichha Sugar Company Ltd. (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand-HC) n) CIT v. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. (201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing additions/disallowances: 1. Addition on account of interest u/s.244A : 46,960 2. Disallowance for alleged late payment of Employees contribution to Provident Fund and ESIC u/s.36(1)(va) : 14,56,844 3. Disallowance out of sales commission : 6,00,000 Thereafter, the appellant filed first statutory appeal before the ld.CIT(A)- Gandhinagar, wherein he had confirmed the additions made by the AO on account of interest u/s.244A of ₹ 46,960/- and disallowance made u/s.36(l)(va) of ₹ 14,56,844/-. The CIT(A) has d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ancial Year 2015-16, which is also subject to certain rectification on factual grounds as the amount of set off of different years is not correct. They have made separate entry in general voucher dated 01/04/2015 mentioning Being the jv pass for interest received form Income Tax Dep. for the A.Y. 2009-10. Interest income booked in F.Y. 2015-16 . In our considered opinion, in such circumstances no addition can be made. In the result, this ground of appeal is in favour of the assessee. 5. So far as Ground No.3 is concerned being late payment of employees contributions of provident fund and ESIC by invoking Section 36(1)(va) of the I.T. Act. On verification of P L account noticed that assessee had debited ₹ 19,71,067/- towards co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
