9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 270X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt cases from those decided by the ITAT have been pointed out by the Ld. DR before us and admittedly the amounts of employees' contribution to ESI and PF stood paid before the due date of filing of return of income, the issue of disallowance on account of delayed payments of employees' contribution to ESI and PF is squarely covered by the aforesaid decisions, following which the disallowance made of ESI/PF employees' contribution u/s. 36(1)(va) is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 23/CHD/2022 - - - Dated:- 11-4-2022 - SHRI SANJAY GARG , JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Vidisha Vinay, CA For the Respondents : Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection to the condonation of delay. 4. I have heard the rival contentions and gone through the application for condonation of delay. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am convinced that the delay in filing the appeal is un-intentional but due to the aforesaid factors as pleaded above. In view of this, the delay in filing of the appeal is hereby condoned and now I proceed to decide the appeal on merits. 5. The solitary issue in the present appeal relates to the addition made to the income of the assessee in the intimation made u/s. 143(1) of the Act, by disallowing delayed payments of employees contribution to ESI and PF amounting to Rs. 407,240/- by invoking the provisions of section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 6. The Ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctive and the issue otherwise stands decided by the jurisdictional high court in favour of the assessee. In the case of Ajay Piplani Vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru in ITA No. 114/CHD/2021 order dated 04.10.2021 the issue has been adjudicated at para 5 to 7 of the order as under: 5. We have heard both the parties. It is not denied that the employees contribution to ESI and PF was allowable and claimed as deduction by the assessee on the strength of various decisions of the jurisdictional High Court holding contributions deposited by the due date of filing of return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act as allowable. The Revenue has disallowed the same in the impugned year by applying the amendment made by Finance Act 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made to the section by Finance Act 2021. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) upholding the said disallowance to the tune of Rs. 18,21,088/- is therefore set aside and the AO is directed to allow the claim of the assessee. On similar lines the issue has been adjudicated in favour of the assessee in the case of M/s. Jupiter Aqua Lines Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 6(1) Mohali in ITA No. 83/Chd/2021 dated 27th August 2021. 8. In view of the aforestated decisions of the ITAT, therefore the contention of the Ld. DR before me that the amendment to section 36(1)(va) of the Act is retrospective is dismissed. Also since no facts distinguishing the present cases from those decided by the ITAT have been pointed out by the Ld. DR before me and admittedly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
