TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 633X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Member By Appellant : Shri Miraj D.Shah, AR By Respondent : Shri Surendra Kumar Mishra, Addl. CIT, Ld. Sr. DR ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, JM : The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 03-09-2019 passed by the of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which in turn arises out of processing of return of income u/s. 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( in short, the Act ) by DCIT, CPC, Bangaluru on 03/09/2019 for the A.Y under consideration, whereby a sum of ₹ 1,21,216/- was disallowed/added back on account of failure of the assessee-appellant on account of delayed deposit of employees contribution t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nity of hearing to the assessee. Thus order of the CIT (Appeals) be reversed. 6) For that the order passed by the learned CIT (Appeals) is bad In law and therefore the same be set aside for fresh hearing. 7) The appellant craves leave to produce additional evidences in terms of Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules 1963. 8) The appellant craves leave to press new, additional grounds of appeal or modify, withdraw any of the above grounds at the time of hearing of the appeal. 3. On perusal of above grounds of appeal it reveals that the assessee has contested mainly before us the issue of disallowance of ₹ 1,21,216/-- under the head of ESI/PF for delayed payment under section 36(1)(va) read with sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowing the provisions of section 2(24)9x) read with section 36(1)(va of the Act is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court, Kolkata in the case of Vijay Shree Ltd, ITA No. 245 of 2011(G.A No.2607 of 2011) dt. 12.8.2015. He also invited our attention that the issue in hand is covered in favour of assessee appellant by the latest order dt. 17-11-2021 of the co-ordinate bench of this tribunal (ITAT, B Bench, Kolkata) in ITA Nos. 231,365,366,369,367,368 371/Kol/2021 for the AYs. 2015-16, 17-18, 18-19 19-20 in respect of Lumino Indusries Ors. Copy of which is available on record. Thus, he prayed before us that the disallowance so made by the ld.AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , retrospective in operation. So we have to adjudicate this issue whether the amendment brought in by Finance Act, 2021 is prospective or retrospective in operation. We note that before this amendment has been inserted by Finance Bill, 2021, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of Shri Vijayshree Ltd. Ltd.(supra), M/s Philips Carbon Black Ltd.(supra), M/s Coal India Ltd.(supra), M/s Akzo Nobel India Ltd. (supra) has held that the payment of employees' contribution if made by an assessee before the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act, is allowable as a deduction. We note that by Finance Act, 2021, the provision of Section 36(1)(va) as well as Section 43B has been amended to this extend b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is brought in, which can be discerned from reading of the Notes on Clauses to the Bill which are (i) prospective amendment with effect from a fixed date; (ii) retrospective amendment with effect from a fixed anterior date; and (iii) clarificatory amendments which are retrospective in nature. So when we adjudicate whether the view of Ld CIT(A) that the explanation 2 brought in by Finance Act, 2021 is retrospective, let us look at the Notes on Clauses and the relevant clauses 8 9 of the Finance Bill, 2021 (supra) pertaining to the issue in hand which in clear and unambiguous terms spells out the intention of Parliament that the amendment shall take effect from 1st April, 2021 and therefore will accordingly apply to Assessment Year 2021-2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
