9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1052X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... COURT] . Despite that CPC disallowed assessee s claim under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. In First Appellate Proceedings, the CIT(A) upheld the order of CPC by placing reliance on the decision of non-jurisdictional High Court and referring to the provisions of section 36(1)(va) as amended by the Finance Act, 2021. It is relevant to mention here that the CIT(A) in the impugned order has mentioned the fact that there are judgments in favour of the assessee and the Revenue. Though, the issue has been settled by the Hon ble Apex Court, still some of the High Courts have taken a contrary view, this make the issue debatable. It is a well settled legal position that no disallowance can be made under section 143(1) of the Act, where the issue is de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ards the single issue of disallowance of late payment of employee contribution to Provident Fund (PF) Rs. 91,378/-. The ld. Authorized Representative (AR) submitted that the assessee had filed its return of income on 26.11.2019 declaring total income of Rs. 1,19,78,980/-. The assessee received a communication from Central Processing Centre, Bangalore (in short CPC ) under section 143((1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) proposing adjustment under section 36(1)(va) in respect of late payment of PF. In response to the aforesaid notice, the assessee filed reply stating that the payments were made before due date of filing return of income and hence, no disallowance of the aforesaid expenditure under sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xplaining the provisions in the Finance Bill, 2021. The ld. AR pointed that it has been specifically mentioned in the memorandum that the amendment will take effect from 01.04.2021 and will accordingly apply to AY 2021-22 and subsequent AYs. The ld. AR submitted for the impugned AY, the law laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court of India and the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court would be applicable with regard to allowability of payments towards PF/ESI before due date of filing of the return of income. 3. Per contra, Sh. R. A. Dhyani representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing the appeal of the assessee. 4. Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. The solitary issue r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the decisions referred by the assessee which includes decision of Hon ble Supreme Court of India and the decision of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court. The Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ghatge Patil Transport (supra) following the judgment rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (supra) held that assessee would be eligible for claiming deduction in respect of delayed payment (as per respective Act) of PF of employees contribution, if paid before due date of filing return of income. Therefore,, the reason given by CIT(A) to disallow the claim of assessee is unsustainable. 6. In so far as applicability of Explanation (2) to section 36(1)(va) inserted by the Finance Act, 2021, the same is effect from 01.04.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
