HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Bangalore
IT Appeal Nos. 911 & 913 of 2007
April 9, 2008
Deepak Verma, J.
M.V. Seshadmla for the appellants.
2. Heard on admission. Records perused.
3. Both the appeals have been preferred by the revenue under section 260-A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the act’ for brevity) against the common order dated 13.7.2007 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Bangalore, in revenues ITA.Nos.460 and 461/Bang/2006 for the assessment years 2001-2002 and 2000-2001 respectively.
4. The grievance of the revenue is that proviso appended to section 43B of the Act permitting allowing of deduction of PF, ESI etc., subsequent to the close of the accounting period but before the return is filed, should not have been followed but disallowance must be upheld. It has not been disputed before us that the proviso has been inserted by the Finance Act, 1987 effective from 1.4.1988. In view of this, the appeals preferred by the revenue have been dismissed.
5. We have also been informed that similar questions had come up for consideration before a bench of this Court in CIT v. Sabri Enterprises  298 ITR 141 (Kar. ) and connected matters, which came to be disposed of on merits on 03-07-2007. After elaborate discussion on the questions projected therein, the Court came to the conclusion that both the questions are to be answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. It was further held that revenue has to accept the payment of ESI, PF etc., paid by the assessee and give the deductions of that amount in favour of the assessee as claimed by it in its return.
6. In the light of the aforesaid judgment, it cannot be disputed that the questions have already been answered by the aforesaid judgment, which would hold good even for these appeals. Thus, without answering the questions, we dismiss the appeals. The copy of the order be retained.