The Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Hyderabad v. M/s. Golden Star Facilities and Services P. Ltd
[Citation -2016-LL-1004-12]

Citation 2016-LL-1004-12
Appellant Name The Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Hyderabad
Respondent Name M/s. Golden Star Facilities and Services P. Ltd.
Court ITAT-Hyderabad
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 04/10/2016
Assessment Year 2013-14
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags specified date • contribution to provident fund • esi contribution
Bot Summary: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee whose contribution towards PF/ESI is not in consonance with the provisions of the explanation to section 36(1)(va) is entitled to claim deduction of the same under section 43B of the Income Tax Act 2. If the answer to the above question is in the negative, cannot the Revenue treat the amount as income under section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act 3. The assessee remitted an amount of Rs.1.52 crores, deducted as the employees contribution of EPF ESI, beyond the specified date as mentioned in the respective acts and therefore, the Assessing Officer added the same by applying the provisions of section 36(1)(va) of the Act. The assessee contended that even if the employees contribution to EPF ESI were not paid within the due date as per the provisions of section 36(1)(va) but if they were paid before the due date of filing of the return under section 139(1), the same is allowable as expenditure in the light of decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd., 319 ITR 36. Learned Counsel for the assessee has also placed reliance upon various other decisions including the decisions, of ITAT, Hyderabad Bench, and submitted that even if there are any contrary judgments a view which is in favour of the assessee has to be adopted in the light of decision of Apex Court in the case of Vegetable Products Ltd., 88 ITR 192. Ld. CIT(A) accepted the claim of the assessee in the light of decision of ITAT, A Bench, Hyderabad in the case of VBC Industries Ltd., Hyderabad vs., DCIT dated 08.05.2015) which, inturn, was based on the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Alom Extrusions Ltd.,. Nothing has been brought on record to show that the view taken by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Alom Extrusions Ltd., and followed by the ITAT, Hyderabad Bench consistently has been questioned before the jurisdictional High Court.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B (SMC) : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT ITA.No.840/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2013-2014 Income Tax Officer, M/s. Golden Star Facilities and Ward-2(2), vs. Services P. Ltd., Hyderabad Hyderabad. 500 081. PAN AADCG2534K (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Mr. A. Sitarama Rao For Assessee : Mr. P. Vinod Date of Hearing : 04.10.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 04.10.2016 ORDER PER D. MANMOHAN, V.P. This appeal is filed at instance of Revenue. following grounds were urged before Tribunal. 1. Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, assessee whose contribution towards PF/ESI is not in consonance with provisions of explanation to section 36(1)(va) is entitled to claim deduction of same under section 43B of Income Tax Act ? 2. If answer to above question is in negative, cannot Revenue treat amount as income under section 2(24)(x) of Income Tax Act ? 3. If not order of CIT(A) on issue wrong and lacks perspective for non-consideration of issue u/s 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) of Income Tax Act? 4. In facts and circumstances of case, whether CIT(A) is correct in allowing appeal of assessee on issued of remittances of PF u/s 36(1)(va) of Act though explanation to said section specify "due date" 2 ITA.No.840/Hyd/2016 M/s. Golden Star Facilities & Services P. Ltd., Hyderabad. for remittance is with reference to Act, Rule, order or notification issued thereunder or under any standing order, award, contract of service or otherwise ? 5. Any other ground that may be urged at time of hearing. 2. assessee remitted amount of Rs.1.52 crores, deducted as employees contribution of EPF & ESI, beyond specified date as mentioned in respective acts and therefore, Assessing Officer added same by applying provisions of section 36(1)(va) of Act. Before CIT(A), assessee contended that even if employees contribution to EPF & ESI were not paid within due date as per provisions of section 36(1)(va) but if they were paid before due date of filing of return under section 139(1), same is allowable as expenditure in light of decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd., 319 ITR 36. Learned Counsel for assessee has also placed reliance upon various other decisions including decisions, of ITAT, Hyderabad Bench, and submitted that even if there are any contrary judgments view which is in favour of assessee has to be adopted in light of decision of Apex Court in case of Vegetable Products Ltd., 88 ITR 192. 3. Ld. CIT(A) accepted claim of assessee in light of decision of ITAT, Bench, Hyderabad in case of VBC Industries Ltd., Hyderabad vs., DCIT (ITA.No.143/Hyd/2013) dated 08.05.2015) which, inturn, was based on decision of Hon ble Apex Court in case of Alom Extrusions Ltd., (supra). 3 ITA.No.840/Hyd/2016 M/s. Golden Star Facilities & Services P. Ltd., Hyderabad. 4. Aggrieved, Revenue is in appeal before Tribunal. Nothing has been brought on record to show that view taken by Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Alom Extrusions Ltd., (supra) and followed by ITAT, Hyderabad Bench consistently has been questioned before jurisdictional High Court. Under these circumstances, consistent with view taken by ITAT, Hyderabad Benches, I uphold order of Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss appeal filed by Revenue. Order pronounced in open Court on 04.10.2016. Sd/- (D.Manmohan) Vice President Hyderabad, Dated 04th October, 2016 VBP/- Copy to: 1. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Room No.507, 5th Floor, Signature Towers, Opp. Botanical Gardens, Kondapur, Hyderabad. 2. M/s. Golden Star Facilities & Services P. Ltd., Plot No.179, Phase-II, Kavuri Hills, Madhapur, Hyderabad 81. 3. CIT(A)-2, Hyderabad. 4. Pr. CIT-2, Hyderabad. 5. Departmental Representative ITAT, B ( SMC ) Bench, Hyderabad 6. Guard File. Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Hyderabad v. M/s. Golden Star Facilities and Services P. Ltd
Report Error