Ito Wd 4 4 Kolkata Kolkata v. M S Arcuttipore Tea Co Ltd Kolkata

Ita No 1190 Kol 2015 Page 1 In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal B Bench Kol Kata Before Shri J Sudhakar Reddy Accountant Member And Shri S S Viswanethra Ravi Judicia L Member I T A No 1190 Kol 201 5 A Y 2003 04 Income Tax Officer Ward 4 4 Kolkata Appellant Vs M S Arcuttipore Tea Co Ltd Pan Aacca 3214 B Respondent For The Appellant Shri David Z Chowngthu Addl Cit Ld Dr For The Respondent Shri Ankit Jalan Ld Ar Date Of Hearing 20 09 2017 Date Of Pronouncement 13 12 2017 Order Shri S S Viswanethra Ravi Jm This Appeal By Assessee Is Arising Out Of Order Dat Ed 24 06 2015 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals For Short Cit A Herein 2 Kolkata For The Assessment Year 2003 04 2 Ground No 1 Is General In Nature And Requires No Adjudication Hence The Same Is Dismissed 3 Ground Nos 2 3 Are Read Together Raised Regar Ding The Addition Made By The Ao On Account Of Employees An D Employers Contribution To P F Rs 74 430 Rs 7 39 504 Be Yond The Due Date U S 2 24 X R W S 36 1 Va And Section 43 B Ii O F The Act 4 The Assessee Is A Company And Engaged In Manufac Turing Trading In Tea And Property The Ao Added The Amoun T Of Rs 10 29 905 And Rs 9 16 568 Towards Employees A Nd Employers Contribution To Pf For Nonpayment Of The Same Withi N Stipulated Time Prescribed Under Section 2 24 X R W S 36 1 Va O F The Act Before Ita No 1190 Kol 2015 Page 2 The Ao The Assessee Stated That The Manager And Su Perintendent Of The Assessee Company Was Empowered To Grant Pf And Settle The Pf Dues On Retirement And The Tea Estate Of The Asses See Was In Remote Area And The Said Delay Caused Due To The Said Fact In Support Of The Contention The Assessee Relied On Itats Order In Ita No 1400 K 03 The Ao Also Found That Neither In The It Act Nor In The Aippf Act That There Is Any Relaxation Apart From The Grace Period For Payment In The Date Of Payment Of Pf However The Ao Has Not Accepted The Submissions Of Assessee Including The Said Order Of The Itat And By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 2 24 X R W S 36 1 Va Of The Act Added The Impugned Amount Of R S 10 29 905 Towards Employees Contribution To Pf 5 Similarly On Perusal Clause 21 Ii B Of The Ta X Audit Report Filed Along With The Return The Ao Further Found Th At The Assessee Did Not Deposit The Amount Of Rs 9 16 568 Towards Em Ployers Contribution To Pf Beyond The Due Date Required U S 43 B Ii Of The I T Act In View Of Above He Also Added The Sum Of Rs 9 16 568 To The Total Income Of The Assessee 6 Before The Cit A The Assessee In Support Of Its Contention Relied On Various Following Case Laws Cit Vs J H Gotla 156 Itr 323 Sc K P Verghese Vs Ito 131 Itr 597 Sc Cit Vs Alom Extrusion Ltd 319 Itr 306 Sc Cit Vs Vijyashree Ltd Itat No 245 Of 2011 Ga No 2607 Of 2011 Cal H C Assessees Own Case Itat Kolkata A Bench Order Fo R The A Y 1998 99 7 The Cit A After Considering The Submissions And Case Laws Mentioned Hereinabove Restricted The Addition To Rs 74 430 By Stating As Under Decision During The Course Of Hearing And In The Written Submission The Ld A R Had Placed Reliance On The Decision Held By The Honble Itat In The Appellants Own Case For The Assessment Year 1998 99 Wherein Th E Same Facts Were Considered And The Honble Itat Has Given The Verdict In Favour Of The Assessee Deleting The Addition The Appellant Has Also Invited Attention Towards Th E Decision Taken On Similar Issues By He Honble Apex Court And Jurisdictional High Court Wherein It Is Held That The Amendment To The Second Proviso To Section 43 B Of T He Income Tax Act 1961 As Introduced By The Finance Act 2003 Was Curative In Nature And Is Required To Be Applied Retrospectively W E F 01 04 1998 Such Being The Ca Se The Employees Contribution To Pf Can Be Paid Before The Due Date Of Filing Of Return In The Instant Case The Appellant Has Ita No 1190 Kol 2015 Page 3 Paid The Employees Contribution To Pf To The Conce Rned Authority Before Filing Its Income Tax Return In Due Time Except For An Amount Of Rs 7 4 430 Which Was Not Deposited The A R Argued That The Addition Towards Employees Contribution To Pf Amounting To Rs 10 29 905 Should Be Deleted In View Of The A Rs Submission And The Verdicts Of The Honble Courts Hence The Addition Is Limited T O Rs 74 430 In View Of The Above Said I Have No Hesitation In Holding That The Asses See Succeeds On This Ground Partly 8 Regarding The Addition Of Rs 9 16 568 Towards Employers Contribution To Pf Made U S 43 B Ii Of The Act The Cit A Restricted The Same To The Tune Of Rs 7 39 504 By Observing As Under Decision From The Perusal Of The Submission And Ar Gument Made By The A R And The Decisions Relied Upon The Addition Made O N The Ground Of Default In Payment Of Employers Contribution To Pf Is Restricted To The Tune Of Rs 7 39 504 9 Before Us The Ld Dr Relied On The Order Of The A O In Making The Impugned Additions On Account Of Employees Employe Rs Contribution To P F Rs 10 29 905 Rs 9 16 568 Beyond Th E Due Date Prescribed U S 2 24 X R W S 36 1 Va And Sectio N 43 B Ii Of The Act He Also Submits That The Cit A Has Erred In Re Stricting The Same As The Same Was Paid Beyond The Due Date Specified U S 2 24 X R W S 36 1 Va And Section 43 B Ii Of The Act And Prayed To Allow These Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue 10 On The Other Hand The Ld Ar Relied On The Impu Gned Order Of The Cit A In Doing So He Reiterated His Same Submi Ssions Made Before The Cit A In Support Of Claim Of The Assesse E 11 Heard Rival Submissions And Perused The Materia L And The Case Laws Relied On By The Assessee Before The Cit A We Find That The Tribunal In Assessees Own Case For The A Y 1998 99 Has Given Relief To The Assessee By Placing Reliance On Various Deci Sions Of The Honble Supreme Court And High Courts We Further Find That The Honble Apex Court Jurisdictional High Court Held T Hat The Amendment To The Second Proviso To Section 43 B Of T He Act As Introduced By The Finance Act 2003 Was Curative In Nature And Is Required To Be Applied Retrospectively W E F 01 04 1998 Therefore The Employees Contribution And Employers Contribu Tion To Pf Can Be Paid Before The Due Date Of Filing Of Return Of Inc Ome The Cit A In His Order Has Discussed The Case Laws As Relied On By The Assessee Ita No 1190 Kol 2015 Page 4 Before Him And Found That The Assessee Deposited To The Extent Which Was Allowed By Him Before Filing Of Return Of Income We Find No Infirmity In The Impugned Order Of The Cit A And It Was Justified Thus The Ground Nos 2 3 Raised By The Revenue A Re Dismissed 12 Ground No 4 Is Relating To Deletion Of Addition Of Rs 85 11 138 On Account Of Bad Debt Written Off 13 The Ao For Not Substantiating The Return Of Inc Ome And Non Compliance Of Notice Issued U S 143 2 Of The Act Added An Amount Of Rs 85 11 138 On A C Of Bad Debts Written Off 14 The Cit A By Placing His Reliance On The Decisi On Of Honble Supreme Court In The Case Of Trf Limited Vs Cit De Leted The Impugned Addition Of Rs 85 11 138 By Observing Th At It Is Not Necessary To Establish The Bad Debt After April 198 9 That If The Assessee Writes Off Bad Debt In Its Books Of Accoun T The Assessee Is Entitled To Claim Deduction Relevant Portion Of Ci T A Order Is Reproduced Herein Below Decision During The Course Of Hearing The Ld Ar Ar Gued And Cited Decision By The Honble Apex Court And High Court The Ld A O Also Drew Attention Towards The Provision Of Section 36 Of The Act Along With The Decision H Eld By The Apex Court In The Case Of Trf Limited Vs Cit Wherein It Was Held That After Apr Il 1989 It Is Not Necessary For The Assessee To Establish That The Debt In Fact Has Become Irrecoverable It Is Enough If The Bad Debt Is Written Off As Irrecoverable In The Accounts Of The Assessee The Ld Ar Has Also Drawn Attention Towards The Profit Loss Account Along With The Notes Attached Therewith Evidencing That The Amount Writ Ten Off During The Year Is Of Interest Nature Which Is Credited To The Profit Loss Accou Nt In The Facts Of The Case Relying Upon The Decision Taken By The Honble Apex Court A Nd Submission Made By The Ld A R Addition Made On Account Of Sundry Balance Written Off To The Tune Of Rs 85 11 138 Is Deleted 15 The Ld Dr Submitted That No Details Were Submi Tted By The Assessee Before The Ao And Nothing Was Brought On R Ecord By The Assessee That The Bad Debt Was Written Off In The Y Ear Under Consideration In Its Books Of Account And Therefor E Prayed To Remand The Issue To The Ao For His Fresh Considera Tion 16 On The Other Hand The Ld Ar Submitted That The Assessee Produced The Balance Sheet Before The Ao And Referr Ed To Clause 13 A Of The Said Balance Sheet And Argued That Inspite O F Having These Details The Ao Did Not Consider The Same And Made T He Impugned Ita No 1190 Kol 2015 Page 5 Addition But However The Ld Ar Agreed To The Sub Missions Of The Ld Dr In Remitting The Matter To The File Of The Ao In View Of Above We Remit The Issue To The File Of The Ao For His Fresh Consideration Thus Ground No 4 Raised By The Reve Nue Is Allowed For Statistical Purpose 17 Ground No 5 Is Relating To Addition Of Rs 21 1 9 607 On Account Of Non Submission Of Details Of Opening Sto Ck Of Flats 18 The Ao Found That The Assessee Did Not Make Any Entries Regarding The Purchase And Sale Or Closing Stock Of Flats According To Ao The Assessee Did Not Produce The Books Of Acco Unt And For Non Reflection Of Entries Regarding Purchase And Sale O R Opening Stock In The Profit Loss A C Balance Sheet Added The Impug Ned Amount Of Rs 21 19 160 To The Total Income Of The Assessee 19 The Cit A On Perusal Of The Profit Loss Accoun T With That Of Detailed Chart Showing Valuation Of Closing Stock B Y The Assessee Deleted The Said Addition The Ld Dr Opposed To The Finding Of The Cit A As No Details Were Submitted To The Ao By The Assessee The Cit A Did Not Seek Any Remand Report From The Ao T He Ld Dr Prayed To Remand The Issue To The File Of The Ao For His F Resh Consideration On The Other Hand The Ld Ar Of The Assessee Did No T Object To The Same Having Considered The Arguments Of Both The P Arties We Remit The Issue To The File Of The Ao For His Fresh Consideration Ground No 5 Is Allowed For Statistical Purpose 20 In The Result The Appeal Of The Revenue Is P Artly Allowed For Statistical Purpose Order Pronounced In The Open Court On 13 12 2017 Sd Sd J Sudhakar Reddy S S Viswanethra Ravi Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated 13 12 2 017 Ita No 1190 Kol 2015 Page 6 Pp Sps Copy Of The Order Forwarded To 1 Appellant Income Tax Officer Ward 4 4 Kolkata P 7 Chowringheee Sq 8 Th Floor Kolkata 69 2 Respondent M S Arcuttipore Tea Co Ltd 4 A Counci L House Street Mms Chambers Kolkata 1 3 The Cit A Kolkata 4 5 Cit Kolkata Dr Kolkata Benches Kolkata True Copy By Order Sr Ps H O O Itat Kolkata