TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 1955
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the time of hearing none appeared from side of Revenue as well as assessee in spite of issue of notice. There was no request for adjournment as well from either side. However we find that the appeal can be decided on the basis of materials available on record and without the assistance of either side i.e. Revenue or assessee. 3. First issue raised by Revenue in this appeal is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by Assessing Officer on account of capital expenditure for Rs.18,31,210//- only. 4. Briefly stated facts are that assessee is a limited company and engaged in the business of cultivation and manufacturing of tea. The assessee in the year under consideration has claimed following expenses in its profit and loss a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t on the other hand has brought enough evidence on record to establish that no expansion and extension of plantation has taken place during the year. It has been held by the High Court of Kolkata in the case of Tasati Tea that only if there is an extension or expansion of plantation to new areas, such relatable expenses can be held to be capital in nature. Therefore, I am of the view that the expenditure of Rs. 18,31,210/- spent on Soil Cultivation, planting and making shade cannot be held to be capital expenditure. Accordingly, Ground No.1 of the appeal is allowed and expenditure of Rs. 18,31,210/- is held to be Revenue Expenditure." The Revenue, being aggrieved, is in appeal before us. 6. Having perused the material available on rec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he order of Authorities Below. The only issue to be resolved is whether the assessee would be entitled to claim deduction for the employees' contribution made to PF after the due date prescribed under the PF Act, but before the due date prescribed for filing of income-tax return in the light of the provisions contained in section 36(1)(va) of the Act and section 43B(b) of the Act. In this regard we note that section 6 of Provident Fund Act provides for contribution and the manner in which such contribution shall be made. Paragraph 30 of the PF Scheme provides for payment of contributions. As per the said scheme, the employer at the first instance shall make the total contribution including employees' share. Paragraph 32 provides for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s any sum payable by the assessee as an employer by way of contribution to any Provident fund or superannuation fund or gratuity fund or any other fund for the welfare of the employees. The proviso to section provides that any sum paid by the assessee on or before the due date of furnishing return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act, then no disallowance can be made under the provisions of section 43B of the Act. A careful consideration of section 43B of the Act, it is clear that an extension is granted to the assessee to make the payment of PF contributions or any other fund till the due date of furnishing return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. Therefore, in our opinion, there is no difference between employees and employer contribution to PF....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t before due date of filing of return no disallowance could be made in view of the provisions of section 43B of the Act. In the case of CIT v. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. [2013] 35 taxmann.com 616/217 Taxman 64 (Mag.)/[2014] 366 ITR 163 (Raj.), the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan, after referring to the apex court decision in the case of CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 306/185 Taxman 416 & CIT v. Vinay Cement Ltd. [2007]213CTR 268 (SC) held that the deductions should be allowed for the payment of employees' contribution made before the due date of filing of return. Similarly, in the case of CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court held that contribution paid after the due date under....