B.B.KAR,ROURKELA vs. ITO. WARD-1, ROURKELA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 29/CTK/2022Status: HeardITAT Cuttack23 August 2022AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the amendment to Section 36(1)(va) is prospective and that PF & ESIC paid beyond the prescribed date but within the return filing due date is allowable. The disallowance made by the AO and CIT(A) was reversed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was delayed by 12 days. The sole issue was the disallowance of delayed payment of PF & ESI, though paid before the return filing due date, based on an amendment to Section 36(1)(va).

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 43B is permissible for delayed PF & ESI payments made before the return filing due date, considering the prospective nature of the amendment to Section 36(1)(va).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 43B,Section 36(1)(va)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Hearing: 23/08/2022Pronounced: 23/08/2022

O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 28.09.2021 for the assessment year 2019-2020.

2.

At the outset, we found that the appeal of the assessee is barred by 12 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application along with affidavit stating reasons for condonation of delay, to which ld.DR did not object. Thus, we condone the delay of 12 days in filing the present appeal and the appeal is heard finally.

More judgments on Section 43B

All 7,161 judgments and leading authorities on Section 43B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →