TIGER SECURITY AND FACILITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 675/PUN/2021Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 August 2022AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the amendment to Section 36(1)(va) by the Finance Act, 2021, which is applicable from 1st April 2021, is not applicable to the assessment year 2019-20. Since the employee's contribution was paid before the due date of filing the Income Tax Return, the disallowance was not justified.

What were the facts?

The assessee company paid employee's contribution to PF after the due date under the PF Act but before the due date for filing the Income Tax Return. The lower authorities disallowed the deduction under Section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of employee's contribution to PF under Section 36(1)(va) is justified when paid before the due date of filing the Income Tax Return, considering the applicability of the Finance Act, 2021 amendment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Appellant: Shri Naimish S. Dixit &, Shri Sanket M. Joshi
For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :

1.

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 31-08-2021 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (‘NFAC’) for assessment year 2019-20.

2.

We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 44 days. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that the delay of 44 days is saved by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed during National Lockdown imposed on account of pandemic Covid-19. Therefore, the delay of 44 days is condoned.

3.

The assessee raised four grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi justified in confirming the disallowance u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act to an extent of Rs.15,48,880/- on account of employee’s contribution to ESIC/PF in the facts and circumstances of the case.

4. We note that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of providing security services. The CPC, Bangalore vide intimation u/s. 143(3) of the Act made addition of Rs.15,48,880/- on account of disallowance u/s. 36(1)(va) towards delayed payment of employee’s contribution to provident fund. The assessee contended that the employee’s contribution towards PF has been paid before the due date of filing of return of income for A.Y. 2019-20 but however the CPC, Bangalore as well as CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi did not accept the submissions of assessee and the CIT(A), NFAC held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction only if the contribution to the employee’s welfare fund stood credited on or before the due date under the respective Act. We note that the NFAC by following the amendment made by Finance Act, 2021 to section 36(1)(va) of the Act found the submissions of assessee regarding deposit of employees contribution before the due date of filing return of income not acceptable. We note that the said amendment is applicable from 1st April, 2021 and since the assessment under consideration is A.Y. 2019-20, the amendment is not applicable on the facts in hand. We note that the CIT(A) did not dispute the same and it is evident from para no. 2 of the impugned order that the assessee paid the employee’s contribution towards provident fund before the due date of filing of Income Tax Return. Therefore, the order of CIT(A) is not justified and it is set aside. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.

5.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 26th August, 2022.

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 →