9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1295X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovident fund of Rs. 16,87,689/- and Employees state Insurance scheme of Rs. 3,23,898/- which was disallowed by central Processing Unit while passing intimation u/s 143 (1) of the Act . 02 Briefly stated, the facts show that the assessee is a company, filed its return of income on 31/10/2017 declaring a loss of Rs. 38,58,48,484/-. 03 Assessee was issued a communication by the Central Processing Unit on 16/03/2019 wherein a sum of Rs. 16,87,689/- was disallowed with respect to the employees' contribution to provident fund under section 36(1)(va) of the Act and a further disallowance of employees' contribution to the employees's State insurance scheme of Rs. 3,23,898/- under that section. Response submitted to the CPC shows that assessee su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respective Act, disallowance under section 43B of the Act, cannot be made. Therefore, assessee is in appeal before us. 06 The learned authorised representative submitted that the jurisdictional High Court decision in case of Ghatge Patil Transport Ltd (supra) has not been followed by the learned CIT(A). He further referred to the fact that contribution of Rs. 16,87,689/- pertaining to provident fund was required to be deposited as per Provident Fund Act by 15th January, 2017 and same has been deposited on 16th January, 2017. He also referred to the letter dated 12th January, 2017 issued by the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India which has granted 05 days' grace period for depositing a contribution for the month of D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,689/- is incorrectly confirmed by the learned CIT(A). 09 With respect to the employees contribution to ESIC amounting to Rs. 3,23,898/-, undisputed facts shows that though such contribution is deposited after the due date prescribed under the respective law, but before filing of the return of income. We find that identical issue has been decided by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court which is the jurisdictional High Court wherein it has been held that both employees and employer's contribution are covered under the amendment to section 43B of the Act relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs Alom Extrusions Ltd 319 ITR 306 (SC) and therefore, if such payments are made on or before the due date of filing of the return of inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
