TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (12) TMI 164
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hence these are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. We reproduce here the grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No. 630/Coch/2022 as follows:- Section 80C - Contribution towards PF is deductible u/s. 80C Learned Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the Income Tax Officer (TDS), Alappuzha failed to appreciate that contribution towards PF constituted u/s. 61 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act 1969 is a statutory PF which is eligible for deduction u/s. 80C of the Income Tax A ct, 1961. Section 201 - Tax to be charged on the concerned; not on the appellant Learned Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the ITO (TDS), Alappuzha ought to have seen tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e was filed to prove that PF fund falls under category of statutory Provident Fund. As per Section 8 of PF Act 1925, the Appropriate Govt. may by notification in Official Gazette direct that provisions of PF Act (except Section 6A) shall apply to any PF established for benefit of the employees of any Institutions specified in Schedule of Act. By doing so the PF will be as good as Govt. Provident Fund and Custodian of such fund will be Govt. However, no such notification/document was produced by Assessee nor any documents were produced to show that PF satisfies the other conditions mentioned in Sec. 80C(2) of the Act. Thus, in view of above facts, all contributions made by Employees to PF were not considered for deduction u/s. 80C of the Act....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he explanation given by the assessee is bonafide. As such, holding the assessee in default u/s. 201(1) of the Act is unwarranted, thereby including provisions of section 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act is also unwarranted. For this purpose, he placed reliance on the judgement of coordinate bench in ITA Nos. 555 & 556/Cochin/2018 dated 14.5.2019 in the case of Mahatma Gandhi University, wherein held as under:- 12. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We are of the view that the facts and circumstances of the present case are identical to the case of Indian Institute of Science vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1589/Bang/2014 dated 27/02/2015 for the AY 2010-11 decided by the ITAT, Bangalore. In the said case, the issue was with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....months of the previous year is entitled to give effect to the deductions permissible under proviso (iv) to Sec. 17(2) or exemption u/s. 10(5) of the Act in the later months of the previous year. What has to be seen is the taxes to be deducted on income under the head 'salaries ' as on the last date of the previous year. The case of the AO is that LTC and Medical reimbursement should be paid at the time the expenditure is incurred or after the expenditure is incurred by way of reimbursement and not at an earlier point of time. If it is so paid, then, even though the payment would not form part of taxable salary of an employee, the employer has to deduct tax at source treating it as part of salary, is contrary to the provisions of Sec....