Case Law Details
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:
- Entire provision made in the books towards gratuity benefits of employees is disallowed in the ITR filed by the company and:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
