Avail 20% discount on updated CA lectures for Dec 21 .Use Code RESULT20 !! Call : 088803-20003

ICICI

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Is late payment of employee's contribution to EPF an allowable deduction u/s 36 (l)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x)?

LinkedIn


Court :
ITAT Mumbai

Brief :
These are Revenue�s appeals directed against respective orders of learned CIT(A) pertaining to assessment years 2013-14 and 2016-17.

Citation :
I.T.A. No.1010/Mum/2020 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) I.T.A. No.1011/Mum/2020 (Assessment Year : 2013-14)

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“C” Bench, Mumbai
Before Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Ravish Sood (JM)
I.T.A. No.1010/Mum/2020 (Assessment Year : 2016-17)
I.T.A. No.1011/Mum/2020 (Assessment Year : 2013-14)

DCIT,Circle-2(1) (1)
Room NO.561,
5th Floor,
Aaykar Bhawan,
M.K.Road
Mumbai-400 020

vs

Cable Corporation of India
Ltd.
4th Floor, Laxmi Bui lding
6, Shoorj i Val labhdas Marg
Bal lard Estate
Mumbai-400 002
PAN : AAACC2936J

Assessee by Shri Nishith Khatri
Department by Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi
Date of Hearing 01/09/2021
Date of Pronouncement 02/09/2021
O R D E R

Since the issues are common and connected and the appeals were heard together, these have been consolidated and disposed off together for the sake of convenience.

2. On this issue Ld. AO had mentioned that the Appellant had not earned any dividend income on the investment estimated at Rs.57,35,00,000/- in shares of M/s CCI Projects Pvt.Ltd. According to the A.O, if Appellant had earned dividend income on it, then it must have claimed exemption u/s 10(34) of the Act. In view of these facts, the Ld. AO invoked the provision of Sec 14A r.w.Rule 8D and worked out a disallowance of Rs.6,29,08,698/- under Rule 8D(3)(ii) and Rs.28,67,500/- under Rule 8D(2)(iii).

3. On assessee’s appeal, Ld.CIT(A) noted that the appellant submitted that during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under appeal, the Appellant had contributed Rs.69,38,071/- towards Employees Provident Fund. Out of the said amount, a sum of Rs.30,20,066/- was deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective funds and the said amount was deposited before the due date of filing of return of income under section 139(1) of the Act.

4. The grounds of appeal and the orders of the authorities below are similar to the one adjudicated by us in AY 2013-14 dealt with above. No change in facts and circumstances has been pointed out by revenue. Hence, our above adjudication applies mutatis mutandis and for this year also. Accordingly, this appeal by the revenue also stand dismissed.

5.  In the result, both appeals by the revenue are stands dismissed
Pronounced in the open court on 02 /09/2021.

 

Poojitha Raam
on 15 September 2021
Published in Income Tax
Views : 19
downloaded 3 times
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags