TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 1338
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Ahmedabad presents this appeal against the same on the following amongst other grounds: 1. (a) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 2,87,477/- and Rs. 22,076/- being the amounts of employees' Contribution to Provident Fund and Employees' State Insurance Contribution which were belatedly paid but before the end of the relevant previous year and also before the due date for filing the return of income. (b) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the impugned disallowance by invoking the provisions of Section 36(1)(va) without appreciating the fact that suc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e by the learned AO of Rs. 24,220/- may please be deleted. 3. (a) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), has erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 6,16,371/- made by the AO out of expenditure on payment of commission to C. Doctor India Private Limited. (b) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), has erred in law and on facts in confirming impugned disallowance of Rs. 6,16, 371/- made by the AO out of expenditure on payment of commission to C. Doctor India Private Limited on the alleged ground that no tax was deducted at source from such payments and therefore the same is disallowable u/s.40(a)(ia) which is factually incorrect. This observation of the CIT(A) is incorrect as the AO in the cours....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g of the appellant's case was held on 22/03/2013 when the AO through ordersheet entry asked the A.R. to show cause why the foreign travel expenses of Rs. 2,01,140/- and commission of Rs. 6,16,371/- paid to C. Doctor India Pvt. Ltd. should not be deleted. Without affording any reasonable opportunity to the appellant for explaining the aforesaid two items, the AO passed the assessment order u/s.143(3) on the very same day i.e. 22/03/2013, determining the total income at Rs. 79,86,860/- as against returned income of Rs. 67,45,820/-. In the said order, the AO has made the following additions/disallowances: Sr. No. Particulars Amount 1. Late payment of Employees' contribution to Provident Fund u/s. 2(24) (x) r.w.s. 36(l)(va) 2,87....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... August' 2009 76977 20.09.2009 Total 287477 5.1 Since the payments of employees' contribution to PF was not remitted within due date or the grace period as extended under the relevant Act. Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court had decided this kind of ground against the assessee in the matter of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation; relevant Para of the same is reproduced here as under: "Section 43B, read with section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business disallowance - Certain deductions to be allowed on actual payment (Employee contribution) - Whether where an employer has not credited sum received by it as employees' contribution to employees' account in rele....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Reply filed by assessee could not convince the authorities below. Hence, an amount of Rs. 24,220/- was confirmed. 6.1 We have gone through the relevant record and impugned order. We are not convinced with the reply of the assessee that payment of Kantilal Zaveri made in exceptional circumstances is not convincible as appellant has not clarified that how exceptional circumstances were there at the time of making cash payment of Rs. 24,220/-. Therefore, we dismiss this ground of appeal of the assessee. 7. So far as ground no.3 regarding confirmation of disallowance of Rs. 6,16,371/- is concerned. It was noticed that assessee company has made a payment of Rs. 6,16,371/- towards commission on sale of Fans to BHEL. In this regard, vide notice ....