2020 (4) TMI 232

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ds provident fund - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur [ 2014 (5) TMI 222 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] binds and covers the dispute against the revenue. However, the learned counsel for the revenue informs that the Special leave to Petition filed by the revenue against the aforesaid judgement is pending before the Su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the fact that contribution towards fund is not connected with the business but it is diversion of Income and not allowable u/s.37(1) of the IT Act. ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ITAT was justified in deleting the addition of ₹ 860731/- made for depositing the employees contribution to PF ESI beyond the prescribed time limit provided in the respec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 00,000 made by AO as the same was not a business expenditure. So far as question nos.1, 4 and 5 are concerned, they pertain to disallowing the addition and upholding deletion of disallowance of contribution to Energy Conservation Fund. This expense was claimed by the assessee under Section 37(1) of the Act of 1961. It is not in dispute that in respect of previous years, a common judgement date .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X