TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1223X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e date prescribed under the relevant statute. The substantial question of law is answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. The Tribunal has found that payments have to be made only before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) for filing return of income to claim the benefit u/s 36(1)(va). The finding of the Tribunal in this regard is liable to be set aside. Moreover, the Tribunal has directed that the issue regarding deduction u/s 36(1) (va) has to be reconsidered by the assessing officer. In the instant case, the assessee has got no plea that the remittance of employees' contribution to Employees' Provident Fund, Labour Welfare Fund, Employees' State Insurance had been made before the due date prescribed in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 08 to 2010-11. 3. The substantial questions of law for consideration in these appeals are the following: ( i) Whether the delayed payments made to Employees' Provident Fund, Labour Welfare Fund and Employees' State Insurance is allowable as deduction under Section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity the Act )? ( ii) Whether licence fee paid to RPG Enterprises Limited is allowable as a deduction under Section 37 of the Act? ( iii) Whether the consideration obtained on sale of old and unyielding rubber trees is exigible to tax in the light of Rules 7 and 7A of the Income Tax Rules? ( iv) Whether the sale p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cted at the time of payment of salary is received by the employer-company and is treated as income under section 2(24). On remittance of this contribution, within the due date, it is allowed as a deduction under Section 36. If it is not paid to the welfare fund within the due date provided under the relevant statute, it remains as an income in the books of account of the assessee/employer-company.The said contribution having not been paid to the applicable welfare fund within the due date provided, the assessee for all time is deprived of claiming such a remittance, made subsequently, as deduction from the income. 7. In the light of the aforesaid dictum laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in Popular Vehicles and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tribunal on this issue does not warrant any interference. Questions (iii) to (v) 10. Learned Standing Counsel, Government of India (Taxes) has fairly conceded that these questions are covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harrisons Malayalam Limited (Judgment dated 06.12.2018 in ITA No.238/2012 ), against the revenue. Hence, these substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue. 11. Consequently, the appeals are partly allowed. The impugned order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA Nos.456/Coch/2014 to 459/Coch/2014 to the extent of answering the issue regarding delayed payment of employees's contribution t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
