9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 1297X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the amendment made to section 36(1)(va) of the Act will have prospective application. We have also perused the decision of ITAT Chennai in the case of Adhyar Anand Bhavan Sweets India P. Ltd. [ 2021 (12) TMI 558 - ITAT CHENNAI] wherein after following the decision of Hon ble High Court of Madras in the case of M/s Industrial Security and Intelligence India P. Ltd. [ 2015 (7) TMI 1063 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] held that the amendment brought in the statute by Finance Act, 2021, the provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the Act amended by inserting Explanation 2 is prospective and not retrospective. In the case of the assessee, it had remitted the employee s contribution towards PF/ESIC beyond the due date for payment as specified in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further in the course of appellate proceedings. 2. The assessing officer has disallowed a sum of ₹ 50,47,759/- in respect of delay in payment of employees contribution towards provident fund while processing the return of income u/s 143(1) of the Act. 3. The assessee has filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the entire contribution has been paid before due date of filing the return of income. However, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Heard both sides and perused the material on record. Without retreating the facts as elaborated above, the assessee has deposited employee s contribution to PF/ESIC after due date specified in PF/ESIC Acts but before the due date of filing the retur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statute by Finance Act, 2021, the provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the Act amended by inserting Explanation 2 is prospective and not retrospective. 5. In the case of the assessee, it had remitted the employee s contribution towards PF/ESIC beyond the due date for payment as specified in PF/ESIC Act, but within the due date for filing the return of income, therefore, following the aforesaid decisions, we considered that Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in disallowing the claim of deduction of the assessee. Accordingly, we decide this issue in favour of the assessee and disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is deleted. Since we have decided the issue in favour of the assessee, therefore, ground Nos. 2 3 of the assessee are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
