9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Act and the deduction for the same can be allowed only if such amount is deposited in the employee s account in the relevant fund before the date stipulated under the respective Acts. Thus the deduction u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act can be allowed only if the employees share in the relevant funds is deposited by the employer before the due date stipulated in respective Acts. In the present case, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as under : 2.1. The assessee is a company stated to be engaged in the business of infrastructure development. Assessee electronically filed its return of income for A.Y. 2016-17 on 30.09.2016 declaring total income of Rs.94,99,600/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and thereafter assessment was framed u/s. 143(3) vide order dated 18.12.2018 and the total income was determine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd circumstances of the case. 4. On the date of hearing learned counsel for the assessee has sought adjournment. However considering the fact that the issue raised in the present appeal is covered by the decision of Hon ble Apex Court, we reject the adjournment request and proceed to dispose of the appeal after considering the submissions of the learned DR and material on record. 5. During ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. and others vs. CIT others (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC). 9. We have heard the learned DR and perused the material available on record. The issue in the present ground is with respect to the disallowance of delayed deposit of employee s contribution of PF ESI. We find that Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
