Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 1297 - AT - Income TaxDelayed payment of employee's contribution to provident fund under section 36(1)(va) - scope of amendment brought in the statute by Finance Act, 2021, the provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B - HELD THAT:- The assessee has deposited employee’s contribution to PF/ESIC after due date specified in PF/ESIC Acts but before the due date of filing the return of income as prescribed in section 139(1) of the act The ITAT Bangalore in the case of Shivanajappa Vijay Kumar [2021 (12) TMI 598 - ITAT BANGALORE] after following the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka [2014 (3) TMI 386 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] held that the amendment made to section 36(1)(va) of the Act will have prospective application. We have also perused the decision of ITAT Chennai in the case of Adhyar Anand Bhavan Sweets India P. Ltd. [2021 (12) TMI 558 - ITAT CHENNAI] wherein after following the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of M/s Industrial Security and Intelligence India P. Ltd. [2015 (7) TMI 1063 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] held that the amendment brought in the statute by Finance Act, 2021, the provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the Act amended by inserting Explanation 2 is prospective and not retrospective. In the case of the assessee, it had remitted the employee’s contribution towards PF/ESIC beyond the due date for payment as specified in PF/ESIC Act, but within the due date for filing the return of income, therefore, following the aforesaid decisions, we considered that Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in disallowing the claim of deduction of the assessee. Accordingly, we decide this issue in favour of the assessee
|