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 379 - AT - Income TaxBelated payment of employees’ contribution of PF u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s.2(24) - HELD THAT:- It is noticed that there is a delay of one or two day in depositing the employees’ contribution to Provident Fund by the employer assessee when seen with reference to due date of accrual of salary. It is the case of the assessee that the salary also has been paid belatedly and when seen with reference to the actual date of payment of salary, no delay has occurred in depositing the employees’ contribution to Provident Fund. Thus, the assessee has tried to demonstrate before the CIT(A) towards contribution of the employees to the PF has been deposited by the assessee employer before the ‘due date’ in terms of interpretation rendered by the decision of Kanoi Paper and Industries Ltd. [2001 (5) TMI 139 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E] - We observe that the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court [2014 (1) TMI 502 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] does not apply where the payment has been made on or before the due date. The deduction under s.36(1)(va) in such case is available without any fetters. It may be pertinent to observe that disallowance u/s 43B r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act in respect of non-payment of provident fund etc. within the due date is not intended to cover genuine and routine cases on late payment but only those where the employer has mis-utilized the funds collected from the assessee. Addition/disallowance u/s 43B of the Act for such delay of bare one or two days in depositing the employees’ provident fund would thus be wholly disproportionate to the default committed, if any. Thus, seen from any angle, the addition/disallowance under s. 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act is not justified in the instant case. - Appeal of assessee allowed.
|