M/S LUTHRA INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION,AGRA vs. JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AGRA

ITA 48/AGR/2021Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 November 2021AY 2019-2010 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the amendment by Finance Act, 2021, is prospective in nature and does not apply retrospectively. Therefore, the disallowance made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) was incorrect.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction for employee's contribution to PF/ESI deposited after the due date but before the return filing due date. The AO disallowed this amount, considering the amendment by Finance Act, 2021, which was upheld by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of employee's contribution to PF/ESI deposited after the statutory due date but before the return filing due date is valid in light of the Finance Act, 2021 amendments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 2(24)(x),Section 36(1)(va),Section 43B,Section 143(1)(a)(iv)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH: AGRA

Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & DR. MITHA LAL MEENA

For Appellant: Adv. Waseem Arshad, Sr. DR
Hearing: 23.11.2021

PerBench Present appeal was filed by the assessee feeling aggrieved By the order passed by the CIT(A) on 23 June 2021 on the following grounds:- Because Maven case of in any view, in the Intimation u/s 143(1) dt.10.04.2020, the impugned 1 Disallowance of Rs. 1,85,482/- confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) (NFAC) (of Employees Contribution to Provident Fund/ E.S.I deposited during the Financial Year itself before due date of filing of Return) is grossly arbitrary, highly unjust, unwarranted, perverse, wrong, illegal and bad in law

LT.A No, 48/AGR/2021 2 Because in any view, the above impugned Disallowance of Rs. 1,85,482/-has been confirmed by the Ld. CTT(A) (NFAC) in summary and prej

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 2(24)(x)

All 2,270 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(24)(x) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →