TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 1235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of income - AO as well as the ld CIT(A) disallowed the same holding that such contribution becomes the income of the assessee under the provision of section 2(24)(x) of the Act and thereafter if the same is deposit within the due date prescribed under the respective laws then same is allowable as deduction u/s 36(1)(va). Addition/disallowance made by the learned assessing officer of late deposit of employees contribution to the provident fund and ESI, as it is deposited before the due date of the filing of the return of an income but beyond the due date prescribed under the respective provident fund and ESI laws is not sustainable in law - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 6941/Del/2017 - - - Dated:- 3-8-2021 - Shri Kul Bhar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of filing of return of income same is allowable as deduction. The ld AO rejected the contentions of the assessee and disallowed a sum of ₹ 12,16,260/- and passed an assessment order on 15.11.2016 determining the total income of the assessee of ₹ 2,53,89,210/-. On appeal also the ld CIT(A) confirmed the same. Therefore, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. Despite notice, none appeared on behalf of the assessee and therefore, the issue is decided on the merits of the case. 5. The ld DR vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities. The ld DR further relied upon the explanation 2 inserted by Finance Act 2021 w.e.f 01.04.2021 stating that it provides that provision of section 43B shall not apply and shall deeme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pany has not deposited the employees contribution within the due date which is prescribed under the said statute i.e. Provident Fund and ESIC. This issue is dealt by the Hon ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. M/s Bharat Hotels Ltd. 410 ITR 417 wherein the issue is decided in favour of the revenue, without considering the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd.(2010) 321 ITR 508 (Del.). But the Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr. CIT vs. Pro Interactive Service (India) Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 983/2018 pronounced on 10.09.2018 wherein the Hon ble High Court decided the issue in favour of the assessee relying upon the judgment of AIMIL Ltd. (supra). The Hon ble Delhi Hig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any sum received by the assessee from any of his employees to which the provisions of sub-clause (x) of clause (24) of section 2 apply, if such sum is credited by the assessee to the employee's account in the relevant fund or funds on or before the due date. Explanation to the said clause provides that for the purposes of this clause, due date means the date by which the assessee is required as an employer to credit an employee's contribution to the employee's account in the relevant fund under any Act, rule, order or notification issued thereunder or under any standing order, award, contract of service or otherwise. It is proposed to insert Explanation 2 to clause (va) of sub-section (1) of the said section so as to clarify t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
