TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (5) TMI 2163
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that the employees' contribution to PF & ESI are governed by the provisions of Section 43B and not by section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (iv) The appellant craves its rights to add, amend or alter any of the grounds on or before the hearing." 2. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee when this appeal was called for hearing despite notice of hearing was sent through RPA. Accordingly, we proposed to here and disposed off the appeal ex-parte. 3. Ground No. 1 is regarding disallowance of TDS credit deducted in respect of interest on FDR which was allowed the ld. CIT(A). 4. We have heard the ld. DR as well as careful perused the relevant material on record. The assessee claimed credit of TDS of Rs. 14,16,550/-. The AO noted that the credit of TDS in question is claimed by the assessee in respect of the interest on FDR however, no such income has been shown by the assessee. Accordingly, the AO proposed to disallow the claim of TDS credit. The assessee contended before the AO that the amount of interest of FDR is not an income chargeable to tax and therefore, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for the purposes of giving credit to a person other than those referred to in subsection (1) and sub-section (2) and also the assessment year for which such credit may be given." 7. The revenue relies on the phrase "shall be treated as a payment of tax on behalf of the person from whose income the deduction was made" to contend that the assessee's TDS claim cannot be based on the receipts of M/s REPL. However, the assessee fairly admitted throughout the proceedings for its TDS claim of Rs. 1,20,73,097/- that the benefit of such claim has not been availed by M/s. REPL. Therefore, the revenue, having assessed M/s REPL's income in respect to such TDS claim cannot now deny the assessee's claim on the mere technical ground that the income in respect of the said TDS claim was not that of the assessee, given that M/s Relcom (the assessee) and M/s REPL are sister concerns and M/s REPL has not raised any objection with regard to the assessee's TDS claim of Rs. 1,20,73,097/-. 8. This Court's reasoning is supported by a ruling of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in CIT v. Bhooratnam & Co. [2013] 357 ITR 396/216 Taxman 6/29 taxmann.com 275 where th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rajasthan. It is not disputed that the assessee after realizing the interest income from the bank has given back the amount to the State of Rajasthan . Similarly it is also undisputed that the refund of TDS has not been claimed by the State of Rajasthan and is only claimed by the Assessee being the nodal agency of the State of Rajasthan for this project . In our view, no prejudice will be caused to any person if the TDS is refunded to the assessee being the nodal agency with the undertaking to return the amount to the State of 9 ITA No. 247 & 248/JP/2014 Rajasthan Avas Vikas & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. DCIT Rajasthan. In view of thereof and also in view of the judgment referred hereinabove, the TDS deducted by the Income Tax Department is directed to be paid to the assessee and we accordingly hold the same. In this view of the matter, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 5. Similar ground is raised in the assessee's appeal in ITA No. 248/JP/2014 for the assessment year 2010-11. Since we have decided the assessee's appeal in ITA No. 247/JP/2014 in its favour, on the same reasoning we decide the appeal of the assessee for the A.Y. 2010-11 in favour of the assessee. 6. In the r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... view of the findings of Coordinate Benches of this Tribunal in assessee's own case for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2012-13, we do not find any error or illegality in the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) qua this issue. 5. Ground Nos. 2 and 3 are regarding disallowance made by the AO on account of PF and ESI beyond the prescribed time limit provided in the respective Acts which was allowed by the ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard the ld. DR and carefully perused the order of the authorities below. The ld. CIT(A) has considered this issue in para 3.3 as under:- "3.3 I have perused the facts of the case, the assessment order and the submissions of the appellant. Admittedly, contribution to PF & ESI has been paid by the appellant, in all instances, before the due date of filing the return of income u/s 139(1). This fact is therefore, not in dispute. Reliance is placed on the relevant judgments on this issue of the jurisdictional High court and the Apex court as listed below:- "CIT Vs. Vinay Cements [213 CTR 268 (SC) CIT Vs. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur [(2014) 43 taxmann. corn 411 (Raj)]: Held "23. Thus, it is viewed that where the PF and/or EPF, CPF, GPF etc., if pai....