TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 798X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ER This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 31.08.2020 of the Ld. CIT(A)-1, New Delhi, relating to the A.Y. 2018-2019. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance of ₹ 9,59,624/- made by the A.O, CPC passed order under section 143(1)/154 in respect of delayed payment of employees contribution to PF ESI. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the CPC Bangalore vide order dated 25.12.2019 has made adjustment of ₹ 9,59,624/- under section 143(1)(a) on account of late payment of PF ESI claimed by the assessee on the ground that this was not paid within prescribed due date and deposited late in the light of provision of Section 2(24)(x) read with section 36(1)(va) of the I.T. Act, 1961 relying upon the information given by the Auditor in Form 3CD. 3.1. Aggrieved by order of the DCIT, CPC, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A) it was submitted that assessee has deposited the employees contribution to PF ESI amounting to ₹ 9,59,624/- before the due date of filing of the incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ITAT, Delhi in the case of DCIT vs., Planman HR (P) Ltd., vide ITA.No.5152/ Del./2017 dated 15.07.2021. 4. Order of the ITAT, Chennai in the case of DCIT vs., Talenpro India HR Pvt. Ltd., vide ITA.No.265/ Chennai/2019 dated 09.04.2021. 5. Order of the ITAT, Agra in the case of Mahadev Cold Storage vs., Jurisdiction Assessing Officer vide I.T.A. Nos. 20 21/Agra/2021 dated 14.06.2021. 6. Order of the ITAT, Chennai in the case of DCIT vs., Repco Home Finance Pvt. Ltd., reported in [2020] 183 ITD 782 ITAT-Chennai. 6. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand strongly supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that since the assessee has not made the deposits on account of employees contribution to PF ESI before the specified dates as mentioned in the Statute, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) was fully justified in sustaining the addition made by the CPC. He submitted that there are various decisions in favour of the Revenue where the Hon ble High Courts have held that the Amendment by Finance Act, 2015 in Section 43B is restricted only in respect of employers contribution to PF ESI and if the same is paid on or before the due date of filing of the income tax return under se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t no disallowance is called for where the assessee had paid the employees contribution to PF ESI before the due date of furnishing of return of income under section 139(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 7.1. I find the Hon ble Delhi High Court In the case of PCIT vs., Pro Interactive Service (India) Pvt. Ltd., (supra), following the decision in the case of CIT vs., AIMIL Ltd., (supra), has held that legislative intent was/is to ensure that the amount paid is allowed as expenditure only when payment is actually made. It was further held that it was not the legislative intent and objective to treat belated payment of Employees Provident Fund Employees State Insurance Scheme as deemed income of the employer under section 2(24)(x) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 7.2. I find the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Insta Exhibitions Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs., Addl. CIT, Special Range-4, New Delhi vide ITA.No.6941/Del./2017 order dated 03.08.2021 while allowing such belated deposit of employees contribution to PF ESI as per the respective Act, but, paid before the due date of filing of the income tax return, deleted such disallowance by observing as under : 8. We have caref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Products Ltd. 82 ITR 192 by the Hon ble Supreme Court. Hence, in light of the latest decision in case of Pro Interactive Service (India) Pvt. Ltd., the issue is covered in favour of the assessee. Hence, Ground No. 1 is dismissed. 7. Further with respect to the argument of the learned departmental representative that amendment made with finance act 2021 wherein explanation 1 is added u/s 36 (1) (va) of the act with effect from 1 April 2021, is applicable to the present case, we referred to the Notes on clauses at the time of introduction of the finance bill 2021 which says as Under:- Clause 8 of the Bill seeks to amend section 36 of the Income tax Act, relating to other deductions. Sub-section (1) of the said section provides for allowing of deductions provided for in the clauses thereof for computing the income referred to in section 28 of the said Act. Clause (va) of the said sub-section provides for allowance of deduction for 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
