TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 138
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re arising out of the order u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961(In short the 'Act') dated 25.02.2020 & 19.06.2019 framed by ACIT,CPC, Bangalore. The Assessee namely Natraj Dal Mill has raised following grounds of appeal in ITANo. 153/Ind/2021: 1. On the facts and circumstance of the case, the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi erred in sustaining disallowance of employee's contribution to PF and ESI of Rs. 1,14,038/- and Rs. 12,615/- respectively paid late by the appellant which is wrong, illegal and unjustified. 2. Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the facts of the case in proper perspective. 3. The appellant prays for relief. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly erred, both on facts and in law, in not considering and appreciating the material fact that the entire payment of the impugned sum made by the appellant was also eligible for deduction under s.37(1) of the Act. That, the appellant further craves leave to add, alter or amend the foregoing ground of appeal as and when considered necessary 2. As the issues raised in these appeals are common relate to different assesse's at the request of all the parties, both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for sake of convenience and brevity. 3. The common grievance relates to disallowance of employees contribution to PF & ESIC and for adjudicating this issue we take the facts in case of Natra....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a.Sagun Foundry (P) Ltd. vs. CIT [2007] 78 taxmann.com 47 (Allahabad) b. Bihar State Warehousing Corporation Ltd. vs. DCIT [2017] 393 ITR 386(Patna) c. Pr. CIT vs. Rajasthan State Beverage Corpn. Ltd. (20017) 250 Taxman 32 (Rajasthan) d. Pr. CIT vs. Hind Filter Ltd. [2018] 90 taxmann.com 51(Bombay) 7. Per contra ld. DR submitted that the issue is debatable and some of the Hon'ble High Courts have also decided against the assessee on this particular issue, but agreed that no decisions on this issue have been given by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. Reliance placed on following decisions: 1.Pr. CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd. (2020) 115 Taxmann.com 340 (Gujarat) b. CIT vs. Merchem ltd....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Filters and Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (2020) 8 ITJ online 6, (2020) 37 ITJ 61 has dealt delay with very same issue and on observing similar set of facts deleted the disallowance relying on various judgments observing as follows: 25. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the Authorities below. In the light of judgment of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case cited (supra), wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held as under: "3. However, taking into consideration, the judgement of this court in the case of assessee itself in D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.150/2016 (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. Jaipur-2 v. M/s. Rajasthan State Beverages Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e total amount of employees contribution was deposited in Treasury before the due date of filing of return of income i.e. 30.11.2014. Under these given facts and circumstances Ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance observing as ITA Nos.561 & 562/Ind/2018 Parag Fans Cooling System Pvt. Ltd follows:- Ground No.5:- Through this ground of appeal the appellant has challenged the addition of Rs. 4,17,302/- on account or disallowance of EPF and ESIC late deposit. The appellant made the above payments before filing of return of income. The above expenditure is allowable expenditure in view of Hon'ble ITAT, lndore's decision in the case of Asst. CIT v .Indira Export Pvt Ltd. (201 3) 21 ITJ 372 (Trib. - Indore)- Employees contribution t....