Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>ITAT rules in favor of assessee on grant-in-aid, PF contributions, and interest deduction</h1> <h3>The State Fisheries Development Corporation Ltd. Versus ACIT, Circle-2,</h3> The ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee on all three issues. It held that the grant-in-aid received for salary and PF payments was a non-taxable capital ... Treatment of grant-in-aid towards salary & PF as taxable - received for the payment of arrears of PF of the employees, salary and wages of employees - Held that:- AO made the addition of grant in aid for ₹ 48,22,698/- in the assessment year 2003-04 but the AO in the assessment year 2004-05 has allowed the relief of grant-in-aid for ₹ 44 Lacs. From the facts of the case we find that grant in aid for ₹ 48,22,698/- pertaining to the assessment year 2003-04 was allowed in the immediate subsequent assessment year 2004-05 for ₹ 44 Lacs. The learned AR has produced the copies of the assessment orders for the AYs 2003-04 and 2004- 05 in support of its claim and the same are placed on the record. Similarly, we also find that the grant-in-aid received by the assessee in the assessment year 2004-05 was not disallowed by the AO. The ld. DR failed to bring anything on record contrary to the argument of the ld. AR and he left the issue to the discretion of the Bench. In view of above and in the interest of justice, we are inclined to treat the grant-in-aid as capital in nature therefore it is not liable to tax. Accordingly we reverse the order of the lower authorities and ground raised by the assessee is allowed. Disallowance of employees contribution under the PF Act - Held that:- We find that the AO has made the addition of the amount of the employee contribution as there was a delay in payment to PF authorities. However, from the assessment order we find that all the payment of employees contribution were made before the due date of filing of Income Tax Return as specified u/s.139(1) of the Act. Now, this issue stands covered in favour of assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. M/s Vijay Shree Limited [2011 (9) TMI 30 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] Disallowance of interest paid for delayed deposit of PF - Held that:- Interest paid on the late deposit of PF is compensatory in nature therefore it should not be disallowed on the ground of treating the same as penal in nature, therefore, it is entitled for deduction while computing the profit under the business head. In this view of the matter, we reverse the action of Authorities below and ground raised by assessee in appeal is allowed. Issues Involved:1. Taxability of grant-in-aid towards salary and PF.2. Disallowance of employees' contribution to PF due to late payment.3. Disallowance of interest paid on delayed deposit of PF.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Taxability of Grant-in-Aid Towards Salary and PF:The primary issue revolves around whether the grant-in-aid received by the assessee from the Government of West Bengal for salary and PF payments should be treated as taxable revenue receipts or non-taxable capital receipts. The assessee, a Limited Company wholly owned by the Government of West Bengal and engaged in pisciculture, received grants amounting to Rs. 2,83,41,000 for arrears of PF and salary/wages of employees. The AO treated these grants as revenue receipts based on the Supreme Court's decision in Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. v. CIT, which held that government grants for revenue expenses are taxable. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, noting that the grants were operational subsidies and not for capital investment.However, the ITAT found that the grants were specifically for paying salary and PF to keep the employees in employment and were not part of any general scheme for promoting industries. The ITAT distinguished the facts from the Sahney Steel case and relied on the Delhi High Court's decision in CIT v. Handicrafts and Handlooms Export Corporation of India Ltd., which treated similar grants as capital receipts. The ITAT concluded that the grants were capital in nature and not taxable, reversing the lower authorities' decisions.2. Disallowance of Employees' Contribution to PF Due to Late Payment:The second issue concerns the disallowance of Rs. 43,34,151 as employees' contribution to PF, which was not deposited within the due date prescribed under the PF Act. The AO disallowed the amount, and the CIT(A) upheld this disallowance, stating that employees' contributions are governed by Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) and not by Section 43B, and must be paid within the due date under the PF Act.The ITAT, however, noted that all payments were made before the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1). Citing the jurisdictional High Court's decision in CIT v. M/s Vijay Shree Limited, which held that delayed payments of employees' contributions to PF are deductible if paid before the due date of filing the return, the ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal on this ground.3. Disallowance of Interest Paid on Delayed Deposit of PF:The third issue involves the disallowance of Rs. 5,51,228 paid as interest on delayed PF deposits. The AO disallowed this amount, treating it as penal in nature, and the CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, relying on previous decisions that treated such interest as non-deductible.The ITAT, however, referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Prakash Cotton Mills v. CIT, which distinguished between compensatory and penal interest. The ITAT found that the interest paid on delayed PF deposits was compensatory and not penal, thus deductible under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal on this ground.Conclusion:The ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee on all three issues, treating the grant-in-aid as a non-taxable capital receipt, allowing the deduction for employees' PF contributions paid before the return filing due date, and permitting the deduction of interest on delayed PF deposits as compensatory. The appeal was partly allowed, reversing the lower authorities' decisions on these grounds.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found