Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: form 3cd :: VAT Audit :: TDS :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: VAT RATES :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: empanelment :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: cpt :: due date for vat payment
 
 
From the Courts »
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 M.K.Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax-06
 Arshia Ahmed Qureshi Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-21
 CHAUDHARY SKIN TRADING COMPANY Vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-21
  Sushila Devi vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 Deputy Director Of Income Tax Vs. Virage Logic International
 Commissioner Of Income Tax-3 International Taxation Vs. Virage Logic International India
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-06 Vs. Moderate Leasing And Capital Services Pvt. Ltd.
 ITO vs. Vikram A. Pradhan (ITAT Mumbai)

John Oakey & Mohan Ltd.Employees Provident Fund Trust Mohan Nagar Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward 4(2) New Delhi
January, 30th 2014
                                                                               1



                IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                    DELHI BENCHES : "E" NEW DELHI

                    BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM AND
                     SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M.

                           ITA no. 367/Del/2013
                         Assessment Year : 2009-10

John Oakey & Mohan Ltd.              vs.   ITO, Ward 4(2)
Employees Provident Fund Trust             New Delhi
Mohan Nagar
Ghaziabad

PAN: AAACJ 1608 A

(Appellant)                                      (Respondent)


                  Appellant by:- Shri C.S.Aggarwal, Sr.Counsel
                                 Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, Adv.

                   Respondent by:- Shri Keyur Patel, Sr.D.R.


                                   ORDER


PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM


      This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the

Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-VIII, New Delhi dated 18.10.2012

pertaining to the AY 2009-10 on the following revised grounds.

1.   That the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in upholding the
      order of the assessment.
2.    That the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in upholding
      the findings of   the A.O. in treating John Oakey & Mohan Limited
      Employees Provident Fund Trust as unrecognized on an assumption that
                                                                                  2







      the assessee had not made compliance to the provisions of Sub-Rule 5 of
      Rule 77 of the Income Tax Rules 1962. Such a finding of learned A.O. and
      learned CIT(A) were erroneous when it overlooked the fact that, the
      assessee had filed an application for recognition of provident fund trust,
      in Form No. 40C of the Income Tax Rules and was pending with the CIT
      the prescribed authority.
3.    That the learned CIT(A) has further erred in upholding the addition made
      by the learned A.O. of Rs. 11,85,747/- representing an interest earned on
      investment on the basis that the provident fund trust was not recognized.
3.1   That the learned CIT(A) has overlooked the provisions of section 10(25) of
      the Act before sustaining the addition of Rs. 11 ,85,7471- and ignoring the
      factual substratum of the case.
4.    Further, the learned CIT(A) has erred in upholding the addition made on
      account of interest distributed to the members out of the income earned of
      Rs. 11,85,7471- since he treated the trust as unrecognized.
4.1   The findings of the learned A.O. and learned CIT(A) in the order of
      assessment and appellate order both are misconceived and contrary to
      the evidence on record and the statutory provisions.
5.    That in any case and without prejudice, on one hand the learned CIT(A)
      upheld the addition made of Rs. 11,85,747/- and on the other hand again
      brought to tax Rs. 11,75,9001-. The said action in sustaining both the
      additions are erroneous when none of them were sustainable both on facts
      and in law.
6.    That the learned CIT(A) has further erred in sustaining an addition of Rs.
      11,75,900/- paid as interest on incorrect assumption of fact and in law
7.    That, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition ofRs.
      25,65,0001- the non-refundable loans on the ground that, funds has been
      treated as unrecognized by the A.O. The learned CIT(A) has overlooked
      that the assessee did comply with the statutory provisions of law. Further
      in sustaining the addition learned CIT(A) has completely overlooked the
                                                                               3




      facts on record.
8.    That the learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that the assessee had failed
      to comply with the provisions laid down in Rule 74(4) of the Income Tax
      Rules and in any case and without prejudice the same could not have
      been held as sufficient to hold that the amounts aggregating to Rs.
      49,26,6471- is income taxable of the assessee for the instant
      year.
9.    In any case and without prejudice addition sustained by the learned
      CIT(A) aggregating to Rs. 49,26,647/- be directed to be deleted and it be
      held that, the learned A.O. had misconceived the facts.



2.    The Ld.Counsel for the assessee      moved an application u/s 29 of the

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 for the admission of additional

evidence,   which is an order of the Ld.CIT(A) dated 24.10.2013, wherein he

being the prescribed authority, granted recognition       to the assessee as a

recognized Provident Fund. It was submitted that the said order was passed

on 24.10.2013     i.e. after the disposal of the appeal by the Ld.CIT(A) on

18.10.2012 and as such the assessee could not file the above order of Ld.CIT

and the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had no benefit of this order.



3.    The Ld.D.R. opposed the contentions of the assessee and submitted that

this additional evidence should not be admitted.

4.    After hearing rival contentions we are of the considered opinion that this

is a fit case for admission of additional evidence in the form of an office order

dt. 24.10.2013, wherein the Ld.CIT(A), Delhi II, New Delhi accorded recognition
                                                                             4






of the assessee's P.F.Trust with effect from 1st April,2007. This order goes to

the root of the matter. Hence we admit the same and restore the issue to the

file of the AO to take into consideration this new development and adjudicate

the issue de novo in accordance with law.

5.    In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

purposes.

         Order pronounced in the Open Court on 23rd January, 2014.

                   Sd/-                               Sd/-

           (DIVA SINGH)                         (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY)
         JUDICIAL MEMBER                       ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated: the 23rd January, 2014

*manga

Copy of the Order forwarded to:
  1. Appellant; 2.Respondent; 3.CIT; 4.CIT(A); 5.DR; 6.Guard File
                                                  By Order




                                                    Asst. Registrar

 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Content Management System development CMS development Content Management Solutions CMS Solutions Content Management Services CMS Services CMS Software

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions