TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 1534
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-2, Chennai, dated 29.12.2014 and pertains to assessment year 2010-11. 2. The only issue arises for consideration is disallowance of Rs. 3,69,63,658/- being the contribution made to employees' superannuation fund. 3. Shri G. Baskar, ld. Counsel for the assessee sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ished by a deed dated 2.8.2013. The CIT granted his approval by an order dated 19.3.2014 with retrospective effect from 18.5.2011. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee towards contribution to superannuation fund on the ground that the superannuation fund was not approved by the CIT for the year under consideration. According to the ld. Counsel, if the claim of the assessee co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act, the ld. DR submitted that any sum paid by the assessee as employer by way of contribution to approved superannuation fund can only be allowed to be claimed as deduction while computing the total income. Since the fund was not approved by the CIT for the year under consideration, according to the ld. DR, it cannot be allowed. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and also....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsidered by the Madras High Court in CIT vs Kattabomman Transport Corporation Ltd(supra). In the case before the Madras High Court, Kattabomman Transport Corporation paid to the Government in order to enable the Government to credit the amount so paid to the Provident Fund Account of the Government employees who were at the point of time working in the Transport Corporation. The Government, after ....