PRINCIPLE ACS ENGINEERING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10(1), HYDERABAD
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the disallowance was not sustainable. This was based on the legislative amendment and CBDT clarification that the provisions regarding disallowance of employee's contribution to ESI/PF were applicable prospectively from April 1, 2021.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 concerned a disallowance of Rs. 8,82,048/- related to ESI/PF contributions. The assessee argued the payment was made before the due date for filing the return, while the Revenue contended it was after the statutory due date.
What were the issues?
Whether ESI/PF contributions paid after the statutory due date but before the due date of filing the return are disallowable for the assessment year prior to the prospective amendment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for AY.2017-18 arises from the CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad’s order dated 15-11-2019 passed in case No.10002 / 2019-20 / C / CIT(A)-6, involving proceedings u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
Coming to the sole substantive issue raised herein of ESI/PF disallowance of Rs.8,82,048/- made in both the lower proceedings the assessee’s and Revenue’s pleas before us are that the same has been paid before the due date of filing Sec.139(1) return and after the due date prescribed in the corresponding statute(s); respectively. We notice in this factual backdrop that the legislature has not only incorporated necessary amendment in Sections 36(1)(va) as well as u/s. 43B vide Finance Act, 2021 to this effect but also the CBDT has issued Memorandum of Explanation that the same applies w.e.f. 01-04-2021 only. It is further not an issue that the foregoing legislative amendments have proposed employers’ contribution/disallowance u/s.43B as against employee’s contribution u/s.36(va) of the Act; respectively. However, keeping in mind the fact that the same has been clarified to be applicable only with prospective effect from 01-04-2021 only, we hold that the impugned disallowance is not sustainable in view of all these latest developments. The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is deleted therefore.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms.
Order pronounced in the open court on 8th October, 2021
More judgments on Section 36(1)(va)
- Vco Consulatatns and Sevices Private… vs ITO, Corporate Ward 3(3), ChennaiITA 2145/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- R K Swamy Limited, Chennai vs DCIT Non Corporate Circle 10(1), ChennaiITA 504/CHNY/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- M/S. R.K. Swamy Ltd., Chennai vs DCIT, Ncc-10(1), ChennaiITA 2822/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Rajesh Maru, Mhow vs ITO-5(1), IndoreITA 839/IND/2025[2023-2024]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2023-2024
- Rajesh Maru, Mhow vs ITO-5(1), IndoreITA 838/IND/2025[2022-2023]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2022-2023
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026