9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 1069X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year 2019-20, the said amendment cannot be applied in the instant case. Therefore addition made by way of adjustment while processing the return of income u/s. 143(1) so made by the CPC towards the deposit of employees' contribution towards ESI and PF paid before the due date of filing of the return of income u/s. 139 of the Act, is hereby directed to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 414/Chd/2021 - - - Dated:- 11-3-2022 - SMT. DIVA SINGH , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : Ravinder Kumar Sharma, CA For the Respondents : Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR ORDER Per Diva Singh, Judicial Member This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned in the respective Statutes, however, the same was deposited well before the due date of filing of return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act. It was submitted that the said fact is not under dispute and where such contribution has been deposited before the due date of filing of the return of income, no disallowance u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act can be made. In support, reliance was placed on decision of the Hon'ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd., 366 ITR 117 and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Alom Extrusion Ltd., 319 ITR 306. It was further submitted that the aforesaid decisions have since been followed by the Hon'ble Punjab Haryana High Court i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Delhi Benches in the case of Insta Exhibition Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA 6941/Del/2017; order dated 01.07.2021 of the Hyderabad Bench in the case of Crescent Roadways Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1952/Hyd/2018 but also consistent orders of the Chandigarh Bench. It is seen that all along the Co-ordinate Benches have held that the amendments to Sections 36(1)(va) and u/s. 43B of the Income Tax Act effected by the Finance Act, 2021 is applicable prospectively and not retrospectively. While coming to the said conclusion, the Benches have relied upon and read from the Notes on Clauses at the time of introduction of the Finance Act, 2021 and have held that the amendment is applicable in relation to the assessment year 2021-22 and subsequent year ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It was further submitted that the said amendment is only declaratory/clarificatory in nature and, is, therefore, applicable with retrospective effect by necessary intendment of deeming nature expressly stated therein. The Ld. DR accordingly submitted that in view of the unambiguous wording of the now amendment provisions of sections 36(1)(va) and 43B, it is clear that the employees' contribution can be allowed as a deduction only if it had been paid within the prescribed due dates under the relevant Statutes and this position has been clarified by the aforesaid amendment. It was accordingly submitted that there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) wherein he has sustained the disallowance made u/s. 143(1) of the Act, by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us Benches of the Tribunal including Chandigarh Benches that the amendment which has been brought in by the Finance Act, 2021 shall apply w.e.f. assessment year 2021-22 and subsequent assessment years and the impugned assessment year being assessment year 2019-20, the said amendment cannot be applied in the instant case. Therefore, considering the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and following the decisions of various High Courts as well as Coordinate Benches of the Tribunal referred above, the addition made by way of adjustment while processing the return of income u/s. 143(1) of the Act, amounting to ₹ 13,97,717/- so made by the CPC towards the deposit of employees' contribution towards ESI and PF paid before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
