TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 475X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in form number 3CD are true and correct. In paragraph number 20 (b) the assessee has mentioned that contribution received from employees for various funds as referred to in Section 36 (1) (va) there has been delay in depositing employees contribution to the respective funds comparing the due date of payment as prescribed under the respective laws. Undoubtedly, assessee has taken due date for payment as prescribed under the respective provident fund law and not the due date of filing of the return of income, which is now being claimed by the assessee as the due date by which the payment should have been made. Based on this, Central processing centre proposed to make an adjustment u/s 143 (1) (iv) stating that disallowance of expenditure i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - - Dated:- 31-5-2022 - SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM Assessee by : Shri Rahul Hakani, AR Revenue by : Shri Hoshang B Irani, DR ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. These three appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), [the learned CIT(A)] for Assessment Year 2017- 18 on 1st December, 2021, for Assessment Year 2018-19 also on the same date and for Assessment Year 2019-20 on 17th December, 2021, wherein, similar issue is involved on disallowance of employees contribution to the provident fund before the due date of filing of the return of income for Assessment Year 2017-18, the disallowance is Rs. 2,94,92,315/- for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earned Authorised Representative submitted that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the Global Waste Management Cell Pvt. Ltd.; A.Ys. 17-18 to 19-20 decision of the co-ordinate Bench in case of Kalpesh Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. (Mum) [2022] 137 taxmann.com 475 (Mumbai - Trib.)[27-04-2022] and therefore, same binds us, it was further stated that this issue is not with respect to the applicability of the amendment by the Finance Act, 2021, but whether Central Processing Centre can disallow such debatable sum or not. 05. The learned Departmental Representative vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities. He specifically referred to the decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in M/s Merchem ltd. (supra) and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... number 3CA is the audit report wherein the chartered accountant certified that the details mentioned in form number 3CD are true and correct. In paragraph number 20 (b) the assessee has mentioned that contribution received from employees for various funds as referred to in Section 36 (1) (va) of the act ,there has been delay in depositing employees contribution to the respective funds comparing the due date of payment as prescribed Under the respective laws. Undoubtedly, assessee has taken due date for payment as prescribed under the respective provident fund law and not the due date of filing of the return of income, which is now being claimed by the assessee as the due date by which the payment should have been made. Based on this, Centra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igh Court covering the issue in favour of the assessee is not proper. 08. Further reliance placed upon the decision of Kerala High Court in CIT V Merchem Limited does not help the case of the revenue in view of the decision of the honourable jurisdictional High Court in 368 ITR 749. As the issue involved in this appeal is squarely covered in favour of the Global Waste Management Cell Pvt. Ltd.; A.Ys. 17-18 to 19-20 assessee, respectfully following the same, we reverse the orders of the lower authorities and direct the learned Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance of late deposit of employees contribution of provident fund as same has been deposited before the due date of filing of return of income. 09. Accordingly we allow gro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|