TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 970X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s. 139(1) of the I.T. Act. Also the amended provisions of section 43B as well as 36(1)(va) of the I.T. Act are not applicable for the assessment year under consideration. By following the binding decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. [ 2014 (3) TMI 386 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] the employees' contribution paid by the assessee before the due date of filing of return of income u/s. 139(1) is an allowable deduction. Accordingly, we decide this issue in favour of the assessee and the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 51/Bang/2022 - - - Dated:- 14-3-2022 - N.V. Vasudevan, Vice President And B.R. Baskaran, Member (A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ections 43B and 36(1)(va) of the Act and also following certain decisions rendered by Tribunals. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before the tribunal. 4. The contention of the assessee was that it has remitted the employees contribution of PF ESI before the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act, even though the contributions were paid in few instances beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Statutes. We also notice the above said fact from column 20(b) of the Tax audit report furnished along with the appeal memo and a perusal of the same would show that the assessee has remitted the payments before the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act for filing return of income for AY 2019-20. 5. The question wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s. 139(1) of the I.T. Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation reported in 366 ITR 170 (Guj.). The Hon'ble High Court was considering following substantial 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 t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to endorse the view taken by the Gujarat High Court. WE agree with the view taken by this Court in W.A. No. 4077/2013. 23. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the substantial question of law framed by us is answered in favour of the appellant-assessee and against the respondent-revenue. There shall be no order as to costs. 7.2 The further question is whether the amendment to section 36[1][va] and 43B of the Act by Finance Act, 2021 is clarificatory and declaratory in nature. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the recent judgment in the 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct, 2021 to Sec. 36[1][va] and 43B of the Act will not have application to relevant assessment year, namely A.Y. 2019- 2020. Accordingly, we direct the A.O. to grant deduction in respect of employees' contribution to ESI since the assessee has made payment before the due date of filing of the return of income u/s. 139(1) of the I.T. Act, It is ordered accordingly. 7. Therefore, the amended provisions of section 43B as well as 36(1)(va) of the I.T. Act are not applicable for the assessment year under consideration. By following the binding decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (supra), the employees' contribution paid by the assessee before the due date of filing of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
