TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (1) TMI 951
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... AO on account of disallowance out of P.F. contribution u/s. 36(1)(iv)." 3. During the assessment from the audit report assessing officer found that assessee had made delayed payment of employee's contribution to the provident fund account totaling to Rs. 25,495/- and disallowed the same u/s 36(1)(iv) of the Act. Before Ld. CIT(A) it was submitted on behalf of the assessee that the Finance Act 2003 deleted the second proviso and amended the first proviso to sec. 43B w.e.f. A.Y. 2004-05 and thus, impugned payments were allowable if paid before filing of return of income and necessary evidence of the payment was enclosed with the return of income. Reliance was also placed on the following grounds:- Addl. CIT vs. Vestas RRB India Ltd. 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... disallow the balance delayed payments." 5. After hearing both the parties and perusing the record, we find that issue involved in this ground is now squarely covered by the decision of Hon'ble ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of L K P Securities Ltd vide ITA No. 638/Mum/2012 dated 17.05.2013 which has been passed by the Tribunal by analyzing the provisions of the Act and after taking into consideration all the judicial pronouncements on the issue. Relevant concluding para of that order on this issue reads as under:- "6.5 The deducibility of the impugned payments has thus to be seen only with reference to s 36(1)(va), which has not witnessed any material changes since its insertion on the statute by finance Act, 1987 w.e f. 01/4/1988. As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le court has clearly held in favor of allowing the benefit of the grace period aforesaid. The AO is accordingly directed to allow deduction u/s. 36(1)(va) where any payment is made within the grace period. We decide accordingly, and the Revenue gets part relief." In view of the above, the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is hereby upheld. 6. Ground No. 2 reads as under:- "2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 5,41,558/- as made by the Ld. AO on account of marketing and field expenses." 7. The assessing officer observed during the assessment proceedings that a new head of marketing and field expenses was created during the year. Though sales had decreased to 50 % of last year's sales, exp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....keting and field expenses on the ground that out of total sales of Rs. 1.05 crores, about 38 lacs were to the sister concern on commission basis and for remaining sales of 67 lacs there was no justification for incurring expenses to the extent of Rs. 5,41,558/-. Ld. CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings found that assessee has been debiting every month expenses between the 35,000 to 57,000 with the narration of the " paid to field staff towards marketing expenses for the month of ...". All these expenses were incurred in cash. No further details of these expenses were made available unlike traveling expenses for directors and field staff where full details were maintained by assessee. Ld. CIT(A) was therefore of the view that when entire ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions question of charging interest on them did not arise. Regarding list C totaling to Rs. 8,65,289/- assessee submitted that there were paid for expenses or for machinery and were not given by way of advances or loan. Assessee also contended that while as per letter issued by the AO amount shown under the head sundry creditors was Rs. 8,65,279/-, while passing order which was taken at Rs. 16,50,351/- The assessee also submitted that AO had charged interest @ 17.5 % amounting to Rs. 7,50,360/- on Rs. 43,87,765/- in list A, which included balance of Rs. 28,72000/- due from Srijee Farming Agency from which assessee has already charged interest amounting to Rs. 5,04,000/-. It was further pointed out by the assessee that though the AO duly narr....