R/Tax Appeal v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle - 1(1)(1) ==========================================================Appearance

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 302 of 2021==========================================================DECO MICA LIMITED Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1(1)(1) ==========================================================Appearance: MR TUSHAR HIMANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MS VAIBHAVI K PARIKH(3238) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALAand HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE Date : 07/01/2022 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) 1.This appeal is at the instance of a assessee and is directedagainst the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’Bench, Ahmedabad dated 19/04/2021 in the ITA No.2198/Ahd/2018for the A.Y. 2015-16. 2.The appellant – assessee has proposed the followingsubstantial questions of law for the consideration of this Court:- (i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, theIncome-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in confirming thedisallowance of Rs.17,77,538/- under Section 36(1)(va) read withSection 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (ii)Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, theIncome-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in notappreciating that the due date of payment of employers’contribution into the Government Treasury as contemplated underthe provisions of Employees Provident Funds & MiscellaneousProvisions Act, 1952 and Employees State Insurance Act, 1948should be reckoned from the date of actual payment of salaryand not its accrual? (iii)Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, theIncome-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in notappreciating that the amounts are allowable under Section 36(1)(va) read with section 43B of the Act, having been depositedbefore the due date of filing the return of income under Section139(1) of the Act? 3.We have heard Mr. Tushar Himani, the learned senior counselassisted by Ms. Vaibhavi Parikh, the learned counsel appearing forthe appellant – assess referred to above are no longer res-integra inview of the main judgment of this High Court in case ofCommissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gujarat State Road TransportCorporation Limited, reported in 366 ITR 170 [Gujarat]. 4.Mr. Himani, the learned senior counsel very fairly submittedthat the issues on hand as such are squarely by the above referreddecision of this High Court. However, he pointed out that theappeal against the judgment of the High Court before the SupremeCourt is pending. He pointed out that the leave has been grantedand appeal has been admitted. 5.We dismiss this appeal at this stage. However, in the event, ifthe Supreme Court reverses the judgment in the G.S.R.T.C. [Supra],it would be open for the appellant herein to revive this appeal byfiling an application for such purpose within three months from thedate of the judgment. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. (J. B. PARDIWALA, J) (NISHA M. THAKORE,J)