DATAMATION SERVICES,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 19/GTY/2022Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 June 2023AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that deduction under Section 36(1)(va) for delayed deposit of employees' PF/ESI contribution is not allowable, even if deposited before the return filing due date. The Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. was followed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerned the disallowance of delayed deposit of employees' contribution to PF/ESI. The assessee's counsel conceded that the issue was settled by a Supreme Court verdict.

What were the issues?

Whether delayed deposit of employees' contribution to PF/ESI, even if made before the due date for filing the return of income, is allowable as a deduction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, “GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

order : June 06, 2023 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग�, �या�यक सद�य �वारा / Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 01.04.2022 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

2.

The sole issue involved in this appeals is relating to the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer/Central Processing Centre (CPC) u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act on account of delayed deposit of employees’ contribution to PF/ESI i.e. after the due date as provided under the respective welfare enactments. Assessment Year: 2019-20 Datamation Services 3. The ld. Counsel for the assessee namely Shri Uttam Kumar Borthakur vide letter dated 03.06.2023 has fairly agreed that the issue raised by the assessee has come to rest by the recent verdict of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2022) 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC) dated 12.10.2022 wherein it has been held that deduction u/s 36(1)(va) in respect of delayed deposit of amount collected towards employees’ contribution to PF cannot be claimed even though deposited within the due date of filing of return even when read with Section 43B of the Income-tax Act,1961. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that by virtue of section 2(24)(x) of the Act, the amounts received or deducted by an employer u/s 36(1)(va), it retains its character as an income (albeit deemed) by virtue of section 2(24)(x), unless the condition stipulated by Explanation to section 36(1)(va) are satisfied i.e. depositing such amount received or deducted from the employee on or before the due date. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that there is a marked distinction between the nature and character of the two amounts – the employer’s liability is to be paid out of its income, whereas, the second is deemed an income, by definition, since it is the deduction from the employee’s income and held in trust by the employer. The Hon’ble Supreme Court thus held that the conditions of section 43B prescribing the due date as the date of filing of return of income in case the employers’ contribution towards ESI/PF would not be applicable in case the employees’ contribution as provided u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act and that the due date in respect of deposit of employees’ contribution would be such as prescribed u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act. Assessment Year: 2019-20 Datamation Services 5. In view of above discussion, we do not find any merit of the appeal of the assessee and the same is hereby dismissed.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed.

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 →