Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM & SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JM
and 994/Mum/2022, is filed by Asish Vishnuprakash Agarwal (assessee / appellant) for A.Y. 2018-19 and 2019-20. The facts stated for A.Y. 2018- 2019 shows that assessee filed return of income at ₹51,42,668/-, which was processed by passing an intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act, wherein a disallowance of ₹472,313/- under Section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was made on account of deposit of Employees’ Contribution towards Provident Fund
The only issue involved in this appeal is that for A.Y. 2018- 19, a sum of ₹4,72,340/-, being Employee’s Contribution towards provident fund dues which are deposited beyond the due date prescribed under Section 38 of the Provident Fund Act, but paid before the due date of filing of the return of income for respective years is correctly disallowed by lower authorities or not. For A.Y. 2019-20, this amount of such contribution is ₹2,09,057/-.
Issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 448 ITR 580, wherein it has been held that Employees’ Contribution to Provident Fund remitted after due date under relevant enactment of Provident Fund and ESIC Act, is disallowable in terms of Section 36(1) (va) of the Act.
Despite notice none appeared on behalf of the assessee. As the issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we proceed to decide the issue on the merits of the case.
The learned Departmental Representative also vehemently submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court has now decided this issue squarely and i.e. the only reason for recall of the order and therefore, the issue may be decided based on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
In the result both the appeals are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 12.07. 2023.