TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (11) TMI 768
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nue, which involves a solitary issue relating to the deletion by the learned CIT(A) of the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of belated payment of contributions towards Employees Provident Fund and ESI. 3. The assessee in the present case is a company which is engaged in the business of training and software exports. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 26.9.2009, declaring a total income of Rs. 69,10,804. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee has collected employees contribution towards Provident Fund and ESI amounting to Rs. 9,53,795 and Rs. 1,06,465. The said amounts, totaling to Rs. 10,60,260, were treated by the Ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etc. is allowable as deduction, if the same is deposited before the due date of filing of the return of income for the relevant year. Respectfully following the said decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, we uphold the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) allowing the deduction claimed by the assessee on account of payment of employees' contribution towards Provident Fund and ESI made by the assessee, after the due dates prescribed in the respective statutes, but before the due date of filing of the return of income for the year under consideration and dismiss the appeal of the Revenue. 6. Now, we shall take up the appeal of the assessee, ground No.1 of which is general in nature seeking no specific adjudication. 7. Grounds Nos. 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....angalore) of this Tribunal in the case of G.Shankar V/s.ACIT(ITA No.1832/Bang/2013 for assessment year 2005-06). We, therefore, restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for the limited purpose of verifying as to whether the assessee company is treated as an assessee in default under S.201(1) of the Act for its failure to deduct tax at source from the payment made on account of audit fee. If it is found on such verification that no order under S.201(1) is passed to this effect, the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the disallowance made under S.40(a)(ia) on account of audit fee. Grounds No.2 and 3 of the assessee's appeal are accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 10. The issue involved in grounds No.4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed as integral part of computers, they were held by the Tribunal to be eligible for depreciation at higher rate of 60%. He held that the items in question involved in the case of the assessee, on the other hand, were neither computer in themselves nor were input and output devices connected or to related to a computer. Accordingly, relying on the decision of the Special Bench of ITAT in the case of CIT V/s. Datacraft India Ltd. (2011) 9 ITR (Trib) 712 (Mum)(SB), he confirmed the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, by allowing depreciation on the said items at the rate of 15% as against 60% claimed by the assessee. 13. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material on record. As held by the Del....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....omputer was allowed by the Tribunal on printer and scanner. In the case of ACIT V/s. GE Capital Business Process Management Services Pvt. Ltd. (ITA NO.2887/Del/2011 for assessment year 2007-08 dated 13.4.2012) it was held by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal that computer accessories and peripherals such as printer and scanners, servers etc. form an integral part of the computer system, as the same cannot be used without the computer and consequently depreciation at higher rate of 60% is allowable on such computer accessories and peripherals. 14. It is manifest from the various judicial pronouncements cited by the learned counsel for the assessee, as discussed above, that if any assets are found to be integral parts of the computer or comput....