Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

Gratuity cannot be disallowed merely for inconsistent entries in explanation of section 143(1)(a)

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2022 taxguru.in 5143
Case Name
Athena health Technology Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Chennai)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Related Assessment Year
2018-19
Advertisement

Athena health Technology Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Chennai)

noted that the CPC while processing the return u/s. 143(1) of the Act made disallowance of gratuity amounting to Rs. 42,36,722/- being inconsistency in amount disallowed u/s. 43B of the Act in processing previous year, but allowable during previous year. We noted that the assessee has claimed deduction for an amount of Rs. 42,36,722/- being payment made for gratuity to the employees during the year as per s. 40A(7) r/w 37 of the Act and the same was disclosed at Sr. No.10B of the ITR i.e., Page No.30 of ITR u/s. 43B of the Act in the absence of specific field for disclosure in the ITR. It was claimed that the payment made for gratuity during the A.Y 201 7-18 was not disclosed in the tax audit report in the clause for reporting as per s. 43B of the Act. We are of the view that this position led to inconsistency in the column as per ITR and the tax audit report that the amount disallowed u/s. 43B of the Act in any preceding previous year, but allowable during the previous year.

The assessee also submitted that the additional evidence before us along with supporting documentary evidences i.e., extract from the books of accounts to further substantiate the following:

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.