Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 1272 - AT - Income TaxIssues Involved: Confirmation of addition u/s. 36(1)(va) and 43B for Employees' share of PF deposited after due date but before filing return of income. Analysis: 1. Background: The appeals by the assessee were against orders of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi for AY 2017-18 to 2019-20, and AYs 2018-19 & 2019-20 under section 143(1)/154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by DCIT/ACIT, Circle-2, DHN. 2. Legal Representation: Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate represented the assessee, while Shri P. K. Koley, Sr. DR represented the revenue. 3. Primary Issue: The main issue in all appeals was the disallowance related to delay in depositing contribution to the PF fund, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 4. Judgment Analysis: The Tribunal noted the recent verdict of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chekmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2022) 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC) dated 12.10.2022. The Court held that deduction u/s. 36(1)(va) for delayed PF deposit cannot be claimed if deposited before the due date of filing the return, even when read with Section 43B. 5. Detailed Legal Analysis: The Supreme Court highlighted the distinction between employer's contribution (Section 36(1)(iv)) and employee's contribution (Section 36(1)(va)), emphasizing the conditions for deductions and deposits. It clarified that the due date condition is crucial for employee's contributions, and non-obstante clause in Section 43B doesn't override the obligation to deposit on time. 6. Conclusion: The Tribunal, following the Supreme Court decision, dismissed all appeals by the assessee, as the grounds raised were covered by the judgment. The appeals were dismissed, upholding the disallowance of delayed PF contributions. 7. Final Decision: The Tribunal pronounced the order on 17th January, 2024, dismissing all appeals of the assessee based on the legal interpretation and precedent set by the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding PF contribution deposits.
|