9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 417X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .11.2018 of the Act. Accordingly, grounds raised by assessee stands allowed. - ITA No. 433/Bang/2021 - - - Dated:- 4-1-2022 - SHRI. B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessee by : Shri C.R Krishna, CA Revenue by : Smt. Priyadarshini Besaganni, JCIT (DR) ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the NFAC dated 01/10/2019 for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT (Appeal) erred in disallowing the claim in respect of belated remittance of Employee's provident fund and ESI Contribution of ₹ 9,45 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng of the return u/s 139(1) of the Act and in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sahari Enterprises 298 ITR 141, the assessee is entitled to deduction of the same. During the course of hearing before the CIT(A), the assessee made written submissions relaying on few more decisions of the jurisdictional High Court viz., CIT Vs. Spectrum Consultants India Pvt. Ltd., 206 CTR 241 and Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT 366 ITR 408. The Ld.CIT(A), however, dismissed the appeal of the assessee by relying on decision of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in case of Gujarat Road Transport Corporation reported in (2014) 41 taxmann.com 100. The CIT(A) noticed the difference between the employees' contribution an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctive Act. However, the assessee had paid the same before the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to PF and ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation reported in 366 ITR 170 (Guj.). In holding so, the Hon'ble High Court was considering following substantial ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he meaning of Section 2(24)(x) of the IT Act and in which case, the assessee is liable to pay tax on the said amount treating that as his income, deserves to be rejected. 22. With respect, we find it difficult to endorse the view taken by the Gujarat High Court. WE agree with the view taken by this Court in W.A.No.4077/2013. 23. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the substantial question of law framed by us is answered in favour of the appellant-assessee and against the respondent-revenue. There shall be no order as to costs. 7.2 The further question is whether the amendment to section 36(1)(va) and 43B of the I.T.Act by Finance Act, 2021 is clarificatory and declaratory in nature. The Hon'ble Supreme Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... na Urban Services for Transformation Private Limited v. DCIT in ITA No.307/Bang/2021 (order dated 11th October, 2021) 7.3 In view of the aforesaid reasoning and the judicial pronouncements cited supra, the amendment to section 36(1)(va) and 43B of the I.T.Act by Finance Act, 2021 will not have application for the relevant assessment year, namely A.Y. 2019-2020. Accordingly, I direct the A.O. to grant deduction in respect of employees' contribution to PF and ESI since the assessee has made payment before the due date of filing of the return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act, It is ordered accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. 10. In view of the judicial pronouncements cited supra, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
