9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng to the grounds in AY 2013-14. 1. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law. the ld. CIT'(A) erred in allowing relief to the assessee relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in cases of CIT Vs. Corrtcch Energy (P) Ltd. Vs. (2015) 372 ITR 97 (Gujarat) & Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 61 Taxmann.com 118 (Delhi), without appreciating the fact that as per CBDT Circular No, 5 of 2014. it was directed that disallowance u/s. I4A should he made even if the assessee did not earn any exempt income during the year." 2. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law. the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing relief to the assessee without appreciating the fact that late payments of employee's c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roposition that disallowance cannot exceed the exempt income has been upheld. As an obvious corollary, when there is no exempt income there cannot be disallowance u/s 14A. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the order of Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, we uphold the order of Ld.CIT(A). 7. Apropos Ground No.2 On this issue AO made disallowances of a sum of Rs. 49,37,006/- being contribution made towards the Employees Provident Fund on the ground that it has paid beyond the due dates prescribed u/s. 24(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. 8. On assessee's appeal, Ld.CIT(A) noted that the appellant submitted that during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under appeal, the Appellant had contributed Rs. 69,38,071/- towards Employees Prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and perused the record. We find that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision referred hereinabove. It is not disputed that the impugned amounts were paid/deposited before the due date of filing of the return. Ld. DR could not controvert that the issues are could not covered in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, we uphold the order of Ld.CIT(A). 12. In the result, this appeal is dismissed. ITA NO.1010/Mum/2020 for AY 2016-17 13. The grounds of appeal and the orders of the authorities below are similar to the one adjudicated by us in AY 2013-14 dealt with above. No change in facts and circumstances has been pointed out by revenue. Hence, our above adjudication applies mutatis mutandis and for this year a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
