TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 175
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(the 'Tribunal' in short) in ITA No.1173/Kol/2018 for the assessment year 2013-14. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration: "A. Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed substantial error in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 20,38,637/- on account of disallowance for delayed payment of employees contribution to Provident Fund violating the provision of Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act ? B. Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed substantial error in law in giving relief to the assessee on account of disallowance of retention money amounting to Rs. 7,72,10,900/- added back during assessment ? C. Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed substantial er....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... regard to the retention money where the tribunal had granted relief to the assessee by affirming the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A) deleting the disallowance of retention money amounting to Rs. 7,72,10,900/-. If the substantial questions framed for consideration with regard to the retention money are decided in favour of the respondent/assessee, then the other issue pertaining to the disallowance for delayed payment of employees contribution to the provident fund will become academic as the tax effect involved on the said issue is around Rs. 6 lakhs and the appeal cannot be pursued further by the revenue on account of low tax effect. In such event, we will have to leave the question open as the said quest....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8-09 and 2009-10 the tribunal had decided the issue in their favour. The assessee also placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Simplex Concrete Piles (India) Pvt. Ltd., reported in [1989] 179 ITR 8 (Cal.) The contentions advanced by the assessee were considered by the CIT(A) and the sample contract which was produced by the assessee was examined. The law as laid down in Simplex Concrete Piles (India) Pvt. Ltd. was noted and the CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee. While doing so, the CIT(A) took into consideration of the order passed by the tribunal in the assessee's holding company, M/s. Mc Nally Bharat Engineering Co. Ltd. Kolkata in ITA No.100/Kol/2011 wherein the tribunal dismissed the departmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder the contract, the retention money would be released and the assessee would secure the right to receive such retention money. Thus, it was held that when the bills were submitted having regard to the nature of the contract, no enforceable liability accrued or arose and, accordingly, it could not be said that the assessee had any right to receive the entire amount on the completion of the work or on the submission of the bills. Further, it was held that the assessee had no right to claim any part of the retention money till the verification of satisfactory execution of the contract. The above decision would apply with full force to the case on hand. That apart the CIT(A) as well as the tribunal have examined the sample contract produced ....