9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 691X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entre is bad and erroneous and against the facts and circumstances of the case in so far as it is against the Appellant; 2. The learned OT(A) erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant and upholding the rectification order dated 01 June 2020 passed by the learned Assessing Officer ("Ld AO") under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("Act''). GROUND ON MERITS: 3. The Ld C!T(A) and the Ld AO erred in determining the total income of the Appellant for AY 2017-18 at Rs.l,42,05,697/- against the returned income of Rs.l,36,56,394/-. 4. The Ld C!T(A) erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition of Rs. 5,49,303/*made by the Ld AO towards disallowance of PF and ESI contribution of employees p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest under section 234B and 234C of the Act. 11. The Ld CITCA) erred in not appreciating that the Appellant commenced its business from November 2016 and accordingly, the Ld AO ought to have computed the interest under section' 234C only for two quarters and should have given credit to the amounts subsequently paid by the Appellant. 12 The Ld CITCA) erred in not appreciating that the Appellant had discharged the entire tax liability in August 2017 while the return of income was filed in October 2017. The Ld AO has erred in computing the interest under section 234B of the Act. Each one of the above grounds is without prejudice to the other and without prejudice to the grounds of appeal taken earlier. The Appellant reserve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 43B of the I.T.Act, if the payments are made prior to the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. Further, by placing reliance on the amendment to section 36(1)(va) and 43B of the I.T.Act by Finance Act, 2021, concluded that the amendment is clarificatory and retrospective in operation. 5. Aggrieved, assessee has filed this appeal before the Tribunal. The learned AR relied on the order of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Shakuntala Agarbathi Company Vs. DICT in ITA No.385/Bang/2021 (order dated 21.10.2021). 6. The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the Income Tax Authorities. 7. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. On identical facts, the Bangalore Bench of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tial question of law:- "Whether in law, the Tribunal was justified in affirming the finding of Assessing Officer in denying the appellant's claim of deductions of the employees contribution to PF/ESI alleging that the payment was not made by the appellant in accordance with the provisions u/s 36[1][va] of the I.T.Act?" 7.1 In deciding the above substantial question of law, the Hon'ble High Court rendered the following findings:- "20. Paragraph-38 of the PF Scheme provides for Mode of payment of contributions. As provided in sub para (1), the employer shall, before paying the member, his wages, deduct his contribution from his wages and deposit the same together with his own contribution and other charges as stipulated therein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case of M.M.Aqua Technologies Limited v. CIT reported in (2021) 436 ITR 582 (SC) had held that retrospective provision in a taxing Act which is "for the removal of doubts" cannot be presumed to be retrospective, if it alters or changes the law as it earlier stood (page 597). In this case, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (supra) the assessee would have been entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI, if the payment was made prior to due date of filing of the return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. Therefore, the amendment brought about by the Finance Act, 2021 to section 36[1][va] and 43B of the I.T.Act, alters the position of law adve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
