2018 (7) TMI 1998

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d under the provident Fund Act ESIC. We consider that in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [ 2014 (1) TMI 502 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] has held that when the employer has not credited the sum received by it as employees contribution to employees account in relevant fund on or before due date as prescribed in explanation to section 36(i)(va) the assessee shall not be entitled to deduction. - Decided against assessee.
Shri Rajpal Yadav And Shri Amarjit Singh, JJ. Revenue by: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Assessee by: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.R. ORDER Amarjit Singh, This assessee's appeal for A.Y. 2014-15, arises from order of the CIT(A)2, Vadodara dated 08-03-2018, in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Incom .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rief fact of the case is that during the course of scrutiny, the assessing officer noticed that assessee has not deposited the contribution received towards employee's provident fund and ESIC in the govt. account by the due date as specified in the respective accounts. The details of such contribution are reproduced as under:- Contribution towards EPF Month Employees' contribution to PF(Rs.) Due date Actual date of payment April 2013 33231 20.05.2013 20.07.2013 May 2013 39491 20.06.2013 20.07.2013 June 2013 39969 20.07.2013 23.08.2013 July 2013 39896 20.08.2013 03.09.2013 August 2013 44386 20.09.2013 31.01.2014 September 2013 45458 20.10.2013 31.01.2014 October 2013 45277 20 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as disallowed employees contribution to provident Fund at ₹ 51,06,031 and FSIC at ₹ 2,82,708/- paid belatedly even after considering the grace period as per provision of section 2(24)(X) r.w. section 36(i)(va) of the act. 4. Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowances after placing reliance on the decision of jurisdictional high court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation 265 CTR 65. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record carefully. We have noticed that the assessee has not deposited the contribution received from the employees within the due dates as prescribed under the provident Fund Act & ESIC .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X