9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 504X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) and accordingly, Ground Nos.2 to 4 are dismissed Employees contribution to PF u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) - delay in making payment - HELD THAT:- Assessee has remitted the Employees contribution to P.F beyond the due date specified under P.F Act, but before the due date for filing the return of income. This tribunal has consistently taken the view that the deduction is to be allowed even in case of employees contribution, if the same is paid before the due date of filing the return of income. The Tribunal has followed the decision of ESSAE Teraoka Pvt Ltd. Vs. DCIT [ 2014 (3) TMI 386 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ] and Tetra Soft India Pvt. Td. Vs. ACIT [ 2015 (10) TMI 1601 - ITAT HYDERABAD] while delivering the above ruling. - Decided a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of expenditure discussed in the assessment order and for the sake of clarity we reproduce from para No.3 to 3.2 of the assessment order which reads as under : 3. It is seen from the Profit Loss A/c that the assessee debited an amount of ₹ 88,91,065/- towards 'Consultancy charges' under the head 'Other expenses'. This amount has been paid to M/s. I T Lokam Services Pvt. Ltd., which is a subsidiary of the assessee-company and the directors/shareholders in both the companies are one and the same. This issue was examined thoroughly during the course of the assessment proceedings for the AYs.2009- 10 to 2012-13 and the relevant details were called for. Since the issue as pertaining to the above assessment years has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ices. For executing the said contract it engages its own employees and out sourced persons, hence the expenditure for salaries (own staff) and consultancy charges (outsourced persons) appears in profit and loss account. 3.2. At the outset, the reply of the assessee was analyzed to be too general. The reply did not answer the specific query put forth to the assessee with regard to the specific consultancy received and its corresponding application/utility to the project/ supporting services undertaken by the assessee towards its clients. The assessee had neither listed out the client-wise support services matching them with the corresponding consultancy received nor had cited specific instances to demonstrate the necessity for obta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sted the said disallowance made for A.Ys.2009-10 2010-11, 2011-12 2012-13 before the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals), Visakhapatnam. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO following the order of this Tribunal in the assessee s own case for the A.Y.2009-10 and 2010-11.We extract the relevant part of the order of the Ld.CIT(A) which reads as under : 5.1. The Assessing officer in Para 3 of his order, has relied on the decision of CIT(A) and has made the addition as done in earlier years AY 2009-10, and 2010-11. Further the Assessing Officer has rejected the agreement stating that it may be antedated and it is self serving. Theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... then no disallowance can be made towards employees contribution to provident fund for the assessment year 2009-10 to 2011-12. 5.4. Respectfully following the decision in appellants own case, The Assessing Officer is directed to delete the addition of ₹ 5,37,791/ -. 5. During the appeal hearing the Ld.DR did not dispute the facts and no new facts were brought on record. The order of the tribunal was not reversed by the Hon ble jurisdictional High court. Since the facts are identical and the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee following the order of this Tribunal in assessee s own case for the A.Y 2009-10 and 2010-11., we find no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) and accordingly, Ground Nos.2 to 4 are dism ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gislation in favour of the employees is complied with strictly as the contribution was made by the employees. It is only in the case of employer s contribution to PF, to which provisions of sec.43B are attracted and the deduction is allowable under the first proviso to section 43B if it is paid on or before the due date for filing the return of income. Thus the AO held that the deduction is not available to the assessee even if the same is paid before the due date for filing the return on income. Accordingly, the belated PF payments of employees contributions aggregating to ₹ 5,37,791/- are treated as income of the assessee u/s 36(1)(v) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act. 7. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee went on appeal bef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
