SANZYME BIOLOGICAL PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

It transpires at the outset that assessee’s appeal for AY.2018-19 i.e., suffers from delay of four months and five days, stated to be attributable to the reason(s) beyond its control as per condonation petition/affidavit. No rebuttal has come from the departmental side. The impugned delay is condoned therefore.

The assessee’s identical sole substantive ground in both of these appeals challenges correctness of the lower authorities’ action making disallowance of Rs.13,01,032/- and Rs.1,14,306/-, assessment year-wise; respectively u/s.36(va) r.w.s.43B of the Act. 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 statutes; 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. This identical disallowance stands deleted accordingly.

These assessee’s twin appeals are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd September, 2021 Sd/- Sd/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (S.S.GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 23-09-2021 TNMM