SANTOSH KANKANI,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS,WARD 7(2), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 342/HYD/2021Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 October 2021AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the disallowance of ESI/PF contributions was not sustainable. This was based on the legislative amendments and CBDT clarification that these changes apply prospectively from April 1, 2021.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2018-19 was delayed by 281 days, which was condoned. The main issue was a disallowance of ESI/PF contributions.

What were the issues?

The key issue was whether the disallowance of ESI/PF contributions paid after the due date of filing the return but before the statutory due date was valid, considering recent legislative changes.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va),Section 43B,Section 139(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “SMC”, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA

This assessee’s appeal for AY.2018-19 arises from the CIT(A)-3, Hyderabad’s order dated 07-09-2020 passed in case No.10318 / 2019-20 / B2 / CIT(A)-3, involving proceedings u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It transpires at the outset that this assessee’s instant appeal suffers from 281 days delay stated to be attributable to the reason(s) beyond his control as per condonation petition/affidavit. No rebuttal has come from the departmental side. The impugned delay is condoned therefore.

3.

Coming to the sole substantive issue of ESI/PF disallowance of Rs.19,47,635/- made in both the lower proceedings, the assessee’s and Revenue’s pleas before me inter alia are that the same had been paid before the due date of filing Sec.139(1) return and after the due date prescribed in the corresponding statute(s); respectively. I 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, I hold that the impugned disallowance is not sustainable in view of all these latest developments. The same is deleted therefore.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open court on 7th October, 2021

More judgments on Section 36(1)(va)

All 6,054 judgments and leading authorities on Section 36(1)(va) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →