THE DY CIT RG-6(3), Mumbai v. M/S. GOODLASS MEROLAC PAINTS LTD., Mumbai

ITA 2278/MUM/2005 | 2001-2002
Pronouncement Date: 19-01-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 227819914 RSA 2005
Assessee PAN AAACG1276N
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 2278/MUM/2005
Duration Of Justice 5 year(s) 9 month(s) 26 day(s)
Appellant THE DY CIT RG-6(3), Mumbai
Respondent M/S. GOODLASS MEROLAC PAINTS LTD., Mumbai
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 19-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 19-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 11-01-2011
Next Hearing Date 11-01-2011
Assessment Year 2001-2002
Appeal Filed On 24-03-2005
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.MANMOHAN (VP) AND SHRI RAJENDRA SING H(AM) ITA NO.2278/M/2005 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 THE DCIT RANGE 6(3) M/S.GOODLASS NEROLAC PAINTS LTD. 5 TH FLOOR ROOM NO.522 NEROLAC HOUSE G.K.MARG AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K.ROAD LOWER PAREL MUMBAI 400 013. MUMBAI 400 020. PAN : AAACG 1276 N APPELLANT RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : SHRI SATBIR SINGH ASSESSEE BY : NONE O R D E R PER RAJENDRA SINGH (AM) THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.12.2004 OF CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-0 2. THE REVENUE IN THIS APPEAL HAS RAISED DISPUTES ON TWO DIFFERENT GROUNDS . 1.1 AT THE TIME OF HEARING NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHAL F OF THE ASSESSEE THOUGH THE NOTICE OF HEARING HAD BEEN GIVEN WELL IN ADVANC E. WE THEREFORE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DR AND ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 2. THE FIRST DISPUTE IS REGARDING ADDITION OF RS.20 16 546/- ON ACCOUNT OF CONTRIBUTION TO PF ESIC AND EPF BY THE EMPLOYEE AN D EMPLOYER. THE AO MADE 2 THE ADDITION AS THE CONTRIBUTIONS HAD BEEN DEPOSITE D BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER DUE DATE. IN APPEAL CIT(A) HAD DIRECTED THE AO TO ALLOW THE DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF THESE PAYMENT WHICH HAVE BEEN MADE WITHIN THE GRACE PERIOD. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAID DECISION THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL. 2.1 WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DR PERUSED THE RECOR DS AND CONSIDERED THE MATTER CAREFULLY. THE DISPUTE IS REGARDING ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF CONTRIBUTION BY EMPLOYEE/ EMPLOYER TOWARDS PF ESIC AND EPF WHICH H AD BEEN DEPOSITED AFTER DUE DATE PRESCRIBED BY THE RELEVANT STATUTE WHICH I S 15 TH DAY OF FOLLOWING MONTH. HOWEVER A FURTHER GRACE PERIOD OF FIVE DAYS HAS BEEN ALLOWED AS PER THE INTERNAL INSTRUCTIONS UNDER THE SAID STATUTE. THERE FORE THE PAYMENTS MADE WITHIN THE GRACE PERIOD HAVE TO BE ALLOWED. WE THER EFORE SEE NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND THE SAME IS UPHELD. 3. THE SECOND DISPUTE IS REGARDING EXCLUSION OF SAL ES TAX (RS.61 29 65 112/-) AND EXCISE DUTY (RS.86 87 37 82 3/-) FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER WHILE COMPUTING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80 HHC. THE AO HAD INCLUDED THE SALES TAX AND EXCISE DUTY IN THE TOTAL TURNOVER WHILE COMPUTING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80HHC. CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN CASE OF CIT VS SUDERSHAN CHEMICALS LTD. ( 245 ITR 769) DIRECTED THE AO TO EXCLUDE THE SALES TAX AND EXCISE DUTY FROM TH E TOTAL TURNOVER. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAID DECISION THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFOR E THE TRIBUNAL. 3.1 WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DR PERUSED THE RECOR DS AND CONSIDERED THE MATTER CAREFULLY. THE DISPUTE IS REGARDING EXCLUSIO N OF SALES TAX AND EXCISE DUTY FROM TOTAL TURNOVER WHILE COMPUTING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80HHC. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI IN CA SE OF CIT VS SUDERSHAN 3 CHEMICALS LTD. (SUPRA) THAT SALES TAX AND EXCISE DU TY DO NOT CONTAIN AN ELEMENT OF TURNOVER AND THEREFORE THESE HAD TO BE E XCLUDED FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER WHILE COMPUTING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80 HHC. THE SAID VIEW HAS BEEN UPHELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF LAXMI MACHINE WORKS ( 290 ITR 667). WE THEREFORE SEE NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME IS UPHELD. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMI SSED. 5. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 19.01. 2011. SD/- SD/- ( D. MANMOHAN) (RAJENDR A SINGH) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE : 19.01.2011 AT :MUMBAI COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) MUMBAI CONCERNED 4. THE CIT MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED 5. THE DR B BENCH ITAT MUMBAI // TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI ALK