TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (2) TMI 383
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e by Assessing Officer and confirmed by ld. CIT(Appeals) of Rs.80,86,689/- and 23,90,259/-, on account of payments by the assessee of the employees' contribution to P.F. and E.S.I., were restored by Tribunal to the file of Assessing Officer with specific directions to examine whether payment was made within grace period or not in terms of the decision of Hon'ble Special Bench of ITAT, Kolkata in the case of JCIT -vs.- ITC Limited vide order dated 07.09.2007 in ITA No. 1541/Cal/2000. The assessee in para 2 of its Miscellaneous Applications has pointed out that the issue being the time limit within which the employees' contribution to P.F. and ESI is to be paid by the assessee-employer, in order to make it eligible for deduction of the same u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....93/Mum./2005]; (vi) Honda Siel Power Product Ltd. -vs.- CIT [295 ITR 466 (SC)]; (vii) M/s. Mepco Industries Ltd. -vs.- CIT (Civil Appeal No. 7622-7633 of 2009, order dated 19.11.2009); (viii) JCIT -vs.- ITC Limited (ITA No. 1541/Cal./2000)(Kol. Special Bench); (ix) CIT -vs.- M/ss. Vijay Shree Limited (ITA No. 245 of 2011 (Kol. High Court). 3. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the records of the case. It is well settled law that if a decision of any subordinate Court is in variance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then, irrespective of the fact that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was rendered subsequent to the passing of Tribunal order, the order of Tribunal is to be r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the earlier decision of this court in the case of CWT v. Raipur Manufacturing Co. Ltd. [1964] 52 ITR 482 and of the Supreme Court in the case of Kesoram Industries and Cotton Mills Ltd. -vs.- CWT [1966] 59 ITR 767, held that the provision for taxation was a "debt owed" was deductible while computing the net wealth of the assessee. Therefore, the High Court held that there was clearly an error of law apparent on the face of the record and the assessment order was erroneous. Repelling the contention of the Revenue that the aforesaid judicial pronouncements were subsequent to the date of the assessment order it is laid down that the said decisions merely stated what the law had always been and must always be understood to have been. The fact ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iled investigation/ inquiry. The subsequent decisions of the jurisdictional High Court do not enact the law but declare the law as it always was." Hence, it is well settled that a decision of the jurisdictional High Court, even if rendered subsequently, would constitute a mistake apparent from the record investing an authority with jurisdiction to rectify the mistake". The aforesaid decision has been affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT -vs.- Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (2008) 305 ITR 227. Admittedly, the present issue is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT -vs.- Vinay Cement Ltd.(supra). Further, we find that this issue has recently been decided by the Hon'ble jurisdictional H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve heard both the parties and perused the material placed before us. We find that this issue is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT -vs.- Vinay Cement Limited [2007] 213 CTR 268 wherein it has been held as under :- "In the present case, we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of section 43B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in section 43B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return". Further, we find that this issue has recently been decided by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT -vs.- Vijay Shree Limited in ITAT No. 245 of 2011 & G.A. No. 2607 of 2011,....