9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 979X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary proceeding for the issues raised in the show-cause notice u/s 263 - We, therefore, quash the impugned order u/s 263 and restore the assessment order u/s 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act and allow the grounds raised by the assessee. - I.T.A. No. 57/RAN/2021 - - - Dated:- 10-10-2022 - Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ) And Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member Shri M.K. Choudhury, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the as sessee Shri Sanjay Mukherjee, CIT, D.R. , appeared on behalf of the Revenue ORDER Per Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi dated 24.03.2020 passed under section 263 of the In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Representative relied upon the order of ld. Commissioner. 5. The assessee has filed an application for out of turn hearing. Since it is an appeal against the order of ld. CIT passed under section 263, therefore, it is to be heard out of turn as directed by the Hon'ble President, ITAT on administrative side vide his order dated 14th June, 2016. Hon'ble President, ITAT has laid down that such appeals be heard out of turn. Considering the smallness of the issue that being covered in favour of the assessee, we deem it appropriate to hear it today itself on merit. 6. Before adverting to the issue on merit, we find that Registry has raised an objection that appeal is time barred. However, it is to be noted that the impugned order w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n hearing. The ld. A.R. for the assessee submitted that the only issue involved in the appeals relates to confirmation of additions of Rs. 8,23,764/- (for Assessment Year 2018-19) and Rs. 3,87,239/- (for Assessment Year 2019-20), which were added by the ld. Assessing Officer with the aid of section 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) on the ground that employees' contributions towards PF ESI were not deposited by the assessee within the due date provided under these two Acts. Ld. A.R. for the assessee submitted that these payments have been made before the due date of filing of the return and, therefore, the issue is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of (i) CIT -vs.- Vijayshree Ltd. in I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es Limited Others read as under:- 17. Have heard both the parties. We note that the Finance Bill, 2021 has brought in an amendment which disallows the employees' contribution made in PF and ESI if not made within the due date as prescribed by the respective statutes (PF and ESI Act). So after the amendment has been inserted according to Shri Miraj D. Shah takes effect from 1st 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, retro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on. In order to test whether the amendment brought in later is retrospective or not one has to apply the test as laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Snowtex Investment Ltd. (supra) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme court took note of the law laid down on this issue by the Constitution Bench in M/s. Vatika Township Ltd. and held that the intent of the Parliament/legislature need to be looked into 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 b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision in M/s. Vegetable Products (supra). In the light of the aforesaid decision and relying on the ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and M/s. Snowtex Investment Ltd. (supra) and also taking note of the binding decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court on this issue before us in Shri Vijayshree Ltd. Ltd. (supra), M/s. Philips Carbon Black Ltd. (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 app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
