Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against the disallowance of provident fund contributions amounting to ₹99,31,144/- under Section 36(1)(va) by the AO/CPC, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that these payments were made within the prescribed due dates.
Held
The Tribunal found that the issue required verification and thus restored the appeal to the file of the Joint Assessing Officer (JAO). The JAO was directed to verify if the payments were indeed made within the due time and, if so, allow the deduction.
Key Issues
Whether the disallowance of provident fund contributions under Section 36(1)(va) was justified when the assessee claimed payments were made within due dates.
Sections Cited
Section 36(1)(va)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 12.09.2025 for the AY 2021-22.
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the disallowance made by the ld. AO/ CPC on account of provident fund of ₹99,31,144/- u/s 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 which was confirmed by the ld. CIT (A) was in fact paid within the due dates. The ld. AR therefore prayed that the same may be restored to the file of the ld. JAO so that the same could be verified and decided denovo.
The ld. DR on the other had fairly agreed with that the ld. JAO. should examine and verify these payments and decide the issue accordingly.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26.02.2026.