Case Law Details

Case Name : The ACIT Vs M/s. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd. (ITAT Jaipur)
Appeal Number : ITA Nos. 23/JP/2014
Date of Judgement/Order : 26/10/2015
Related Assessment Year : 2007-08
Courts : All ITAT (4777) ITAT Jaipur (89)

ACIT Vs. M/s. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd. (ITAT Jaipur)– he AO disallowed the payment on the ground that though the amount was paid by the assessee but was not paid within the due date as given under the respective Acts of GPF, CPF and ESI. It was held that the employee’s contribution towards GPF, CPF and ESI deposited by the assessee on or before the due date of filing the return u/s 139, though beyond the due date as given under the respective Acts, cannot be disallowed u/s 43B or 36(1)(va).

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR

BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM

ITA Nos. 23/JP/2014 – Assessment Year : 2007-08

ITA Nos. 24/JP/2014 – Assessment Year : 2007-08

The ACIT Vs. M/s. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd.

Revenue by : Shri M.S. Meena, CIT -DR Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal , CA

Date of Hearing : 20/10/2015

Date of Pronouncement : 26 /10/2015

ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM:-

Both these appeals have been filed by the Revenue against two different orders of the ld. CIT(A), Jodhpur (Camp at Jaipur) dated

04-11-2013 for the assessment year 2007-08 wherein following grounds have been raised by the Revenue.

ITA No. 23/JP/2014 – A.Y. 2007-08

‘’(i) (a) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 4,96,16,314/- made for depositing the employee’s contribution to CPF & GPF beyond the prescribed time limit provided in respective Acts.

(b) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that employee’s contribution to PF are governed by the provision of Section 43B and not by Section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of I.T. Act.’’

ITA No. 24/JP/2014 – A.Y. 2007-08

‘’(i) (a) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 12,15,66,018/- made for depositing the employee’s contribution to CPF, GPF & ESI beyond the prescribed time limit provided in respective Acts.

(b) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that employee’s contribution to PF are governed by the provision of Section 43B and not by Section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of I.T. Act.’’

2.1 The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset contends that the issue in question is covered in favour of the assessee by following Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court judgements in assessee’s own case.

(i) CIT vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj.) – The assessee claimed payment of GPF, CPF and ESI u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the I.T. Act on the ground that the same was deposited on or before the due date of furnishing IT return u/s 139> The AO disallowed the payment on the ground that though the amount was paid by the assessee but was not paid within the due date as given under the respective Acts of GPF, CPF and ESI. It was held that the employee’s contribution towards GPF, CPF and ESI deposited by the assessee on or before the due date of filing the return u/s 139, though beyond the due date as given under the respective Acts, cannot be disallowed u/s 43B or 36(1)(va).

It is further contended that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in following two cases have adopted the similar view.

(i) CIT vs. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (2014) 363 ITR 70 (Raj.) – Where PF and / or EPF, CPF, GPF etc. was paid after the due date under the respective Acts but before filing of return of income tax u/s 139(1), it could not be disallowed u/s 43B or 36(1)(va)

(ii) CIT vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 163 (Raj.) – Payment of employee’s contribution towards PF and ESI made belatedly but within the due date of filing of return, cannot be disallowed u/s 43B.

In all these judgements, it has been held by the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court that belated payments of CPF, GPF and ESI of employees contribution if paid before due date of filing of return, is an allowable expenditure. The ld. AR of the assessee further submitted that in assessee’s case the relevant payments were made before due date of filing of return. Therefore, Revenue’s appeals may be dismissed.

2.2 The ld. DR is heard.

2.3 We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. We find merit in the arguments of the ld. AR of the assessee. Respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of the assessee (supra) and in the cases of CIT vs. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur and CIT vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. (supra), we uphold the orders of the ld. CIT(A). Thus both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed.

3.0 In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 26 /10/2015.

More Under Income Tax

Posted Under

Category : Income Tax (26750)
Type : Judiciary (10917)
Tags : ITAT Judgments (4959) section 43B (83)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *