9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome Tax Versus Amoli Organics (P) Ltd. [2013 (11) TMI 971 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ] . Hence, the order passed by the Tribunal dated 02.01.2007 and by the Assessing Officer dated 24.02.2006 are quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted to the Assessing Officer for consideration of the first question afresh in light of the aforementioned judgment of this Court. Whether, the omission of second proviso to Section 43B by Finance Act, 2003 being curative in nature has retrospective effect or not? - Held that:- The issue s also settled by the judgment of this Court rendered in CIT v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., [2013 (12) TMI 1591 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] wherein, it has been held that in view of retrospective amendment in first proviso to secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the disallowance of the payment of Provident Fund Contribution made after due date pursuant to the provisions of Section 43B read with Section 36 (1) (va) of the Act? II. Whether, the omission of second proviso to Section 43B by Finance Act, 2003 being curative in nature has retrospective effect or not? 3. The issues raised in all the three appeals are similar but, for the purpose of this judgment, Tax Appeal No.997/2007 is taken as the lead matter; 3.1 The assessee is engaged in the activity of supply of manpower for housekeeping and for material uploading and unloading. filed the return of income on 17.10.2003 declaring total income of ₹ 3,16,250/- . The return was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act. However, it was reopen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e before the due date of filing of return, they were entitled to deduction u/s.43B. The Assessing Officer did not accept the above claim and held that as the amendment in section 43B was brought into effect from 01.04.2004, the assessee would not be entitled to benefit of the same for the assessment year in question as the provisions cannot be made applicable retrospectively. The Assessing Officer, thus, disallowed the deduction and added the amount of employer s contribution into income of the assessee. In appeal, the CIT(A) deleted the addition. The Tribunal held in favour of the assessee. In appeal, this Court held that where the assessee was entitled to make payment under the Provident Fund Act within grace period and that if within tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
