9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 606X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pect of employees contribution shares towards ESI, PF, by the assessee before the due date of filing of return u/s 139 (1) - Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 22/Kol/2022 - - - Dated:- 2-3-2022 - Shri Manish Borad, Accountant Member, and Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member By Appellant : None appeared By Respondent : Shri Kausik K. Das, Sr. DR ORDER Per Bench : The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 17-10-2019 passed by the of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Kolkata-21, which in turn arises out of processing of return of income u/s. 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( in short, the Act ) by DCIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee filed its e-return of income for the A.Y under consideration, which was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act by CPC, Bangalore on 17-10-2019, whereby a sum of Rs. .3,05,757/- was disallowed/added back on account of failure of the appellant/assessee to deposit the employees contribution to PF/ESI beyond the due date. The ld.AO found that it was paid belatedly and, therefore, he disallowed the said disallowance. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO, CPC.Bangalore, the appellant assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Kolkata. The ld. CIT(A) considering the various case laws available in his order dismissed the appeal of assessee by upholding/confirming th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... April, 2021 i. e AY 2021-22 and subsequent assessment year and if the remittance of PF/ESI Employees' Contribution is not made within the time prescribed by the PF/ESI Act then the remittance cannot be allowed as a deduction which is prospective in operation. Whereas according to Ld. CIT(A), the amendment brought in is clarificatory in nature so, retrospective in operation. So we have to adjudicate this issue whether the amendment brought in by Finance Act, 2021 is prospective or retrospective in operation. We note that before this amendment has been inserted by Finance Bill, 2021, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of Shri Vijayshree Ltd. Ltd.(supra), M/s Philips Carbon Black Ltd.(supra), M/s Coal India Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o for ascertaining whether the amendment should be retrospective or not. In Vatika Township Ltd. (supra) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the notes on clauses appended to the Finance Bill will throw light as to the legislative intent; because it has to be borne in mind that Parliament/legislature is aware of three concepts before an amendment is brought in, which can be discerned from reading of the Notes on Clauses to the Bill which are (i) prospective amendment with effect from a fixed date; (ii) retrospective amendment with effect from a fixed anterior date; and (iii) clarificatory amendments which are retrospective in nature. So when we adjudicate whether the view of Ld CIT(A) that the explanation 2 brought in by Finance Act, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... supra), M/s Coal India Ltd.(supra), M/s Akzo Nobel India Ltd. (supra), we set aside the impugned order of Ld CIT(A) and direct the AO to allow the claim of deduction in respect of employees contribution shares towards ESI, PF, by the assessee before the due date of filing of return u/s 139( 1) of the Act. Therefore the appeal of assessee succeeds and so, it is allowed in favor of assessee. 8. Respectfully following the above, the disallowance made by the ld.AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) is hereby deleted. Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 9. Other ground as raised by the assessee is same and identical to ground no.1, which we already discussed above. Hence, the same is not adjudicated. 10. In the result the appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
