9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 171X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d toilet seat cover, molded furniture, etc. filed its return of income for AY 2014-15 on 30-09-2014 declaring total income at Rs. 1,44,22,116. The case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment has been completed u/s 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 on 23-12-2016 determining the total income at Rs. 1,92,23,460 interalia making addition towards disallowance of employees contribution to provident fund u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for delayed payment of provident fund contribution to respective fund within the due date prescribed under the provident fund and miscellaneous Act. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order, assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee submitted that although there is a delay in remittance of employees contribution to provident fund to the respective fund within the due date prescribed under the respective Act, but such contribution has been paid on or before due date of furnishing return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 and hence, in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Alom Extrusions Ltd (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC), no disallowance could be made. The assessee had also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicable in his case for furnishing the return of income under sub- section (1) of section 139 in respect of the previous year in which the liability to pay such sum was incurred as aforesaid and the e vidence of such payment isjurnished by the assessee along with such return. " Therefore, the amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2003 put on par the benefit of deductions of tax, duty, cess and fee on the one hand with contributions to various Employee's Welfare Funds on the other. 8. The section referred to above viz, section 43B and the amendments thereto came up for consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v/s Alom Extrusions Ltd., reported in (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC) when the Supreme Court inter alia held that the amendments to the said section brought about by the Finance Act, 2003 with effect from 1st April 2004 were retrospective in nature and would vrd 7 ITXA399/12 operate from 1st April 1988. The ITAT, relying upon the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court, has dismissed the Revenue's Appeal and confirmed the order passed by the CIT (Appeals). In this view of the matter and in view of the fact that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibution after April I, 2004, would get the benefit of deduction under section 43Bofthe IT. Act. It is held that the Finance Act, 2003 to the extent indicated above would be curative in nature and hence is retrospective. The reason being to be that the employers should not sit on the collected contributions and deprive the workmen of the rightful benefits under social welfare legislations by delaying payment of contributions to the welfare funds. 12. Mr.Naniwadekar also relied upon the judgment dated II th July, 2014 in Income Tax Appeal No.399 of 2012 passed by this Court, to which one of us (S.C.Dharmadhikari,J.) was a party where following two issues of law were raised.:- "(A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the cose, the Tribunal, in law, was right in allowing the claim of the Assessee on account of delayed payments of P.P. of employees' contribution amounting to Rs. 1,82,77,138/- by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cose ofCIT Vs/. Atom Extrusions Ltd. (319 ITR 306) ? (B) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the cose, the Tribunal in law, was right in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 10,00,300/- on bond regist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tually paid by the assessee on or before the due date applicable in his case for furnishing the return of income under sub-section (1) of section 139 in respect of the previous year in which the liability to pay such sum was incurred as aforesaid and the evidence of such payment is furnished by the assessee along with such return." 15. In this manner, the amendment provided by Finajice Act, 2003 put on par the benefit of deductions of tax, duty, cess and fee on the one hand with contributions to various Employees' Welfare Fundsitxa 1002-l2+l on the other. All this came up for consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Alom Extrusions Ltd. (supra). The Tribunal in the case at hand relied upon the said judgment. There is no reason to fault the order passed by I he Tribunal We are of the view that the decision of the Supreme Court in Alom Extrusions Ltd applies to employees' contribution as well as emplovers' contribution. Question Nos.2, 3 & 4 are accordingly answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. " 7.4. In view of the above binding judgements of the jurisdictional High court and that of the Supreme Court, the disallowance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
