9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 1146X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d delete the disallowance of employees contribution to PF/ESIC and employees contribution to PF and ESIC - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.96/Ind/2021 - - - Dated:- 26-11-2021 - Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'ble Vice President And Shri Manish Borad, Accountant Member For the Revenue : Shri Arpit Mundra, AR For the Respondent : Shri Amit Soni, Sr. DR ORDER PER MANISH BORAD: The above captioned appeal at the instance of Assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), (in short CIT(A) ), Bhopal dated 05.03.2021 which is arising out of the order u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961(In short the Act ) dated 21.05.2019 framed by the Assessing officer of CPC Bangalore. 2. B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee referring to the paper book containing 87 pages states that the issue raised in the instant appeal squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/s Industrial Filters and Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (2020) 8 ITJ online 6, (2020) 37 ITJ 61 and disallowance is uncalled for, as the alleged payments towards PF/ESIC contributions were deposited before due date of filing the return u/s 139(1) of the Act. 6. Per contra ld. DR supported the orders of both lower authorities. 7. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We note that the disallowance of ₹ 3,55,940/- was made by the CPC while processing the return of income u/s 143(1) of the Act. This disallowance consti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... available on record and gone through the orders of the Authorities below. In the light of judgment of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case cited (supra), wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held as under: 3. However, taking into consideration, the judgement of this court in the case of assessee itself in D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.150/2016 (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. Jaipur-2 v. M/s. Rajasthan State Beverages Corpn. Ltd.) decided on 4.8.2016 wherein Division Bench observed as under: 5. So far as the question relating to privilege fees amounting to Rs, 26.00 Crores in the instant year as well as the deduction of claim of ₹ 17,80,765/- on account of Provident Fund (PF) and ESI is concerned, the Court ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
