Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

366 ITR 408High Court2014#128 most cited

What is Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

An employer's delayed remittance of employees' contributions to provident fund (PF) or Employees' State Insurance (ESI) is deductible if the payment is made before the due date for filing the income tax return under section 139(1), applying the provisions of section 43B and notwithstanding section 36(1)(va).

519

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. · 366 ITR 408 · employees contribution to PF ESI · section 36(1)(va) · section 43B · due date for filing return · section 139(1) · belated deposit employees contribution · deductibility of PF ESI · disallowance provident fund ESI

Also reported as

222 Taxmann 17032 Taxmann.com 33

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(va)Section 234BSection 234CSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 43BSection 143(3)Section 139(1)

Issues it is cited on

employees contribution to pfsection 2(24)(x)section 36(va)section 43b(b)section 2(24)section 36(1)(va)section 43bsection 43extension of limitationsection 36assistant directorsection 36(1)

Judgments citing Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

Technocon Builders, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2)(1) Represented by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 42/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rajagopal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 6

…u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act and it is not hit by explanation 2 to sec.36(1)(va) of the Act which calls for payment within the due date prescribed under the relevant Act. For this purpose he relied on the judgment in the case of Essac Teraoka (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 366 ITR 408 (Kar.), wherein it has held as under: “15. From bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that under the provision, for IT Act, an extension is given to the employer to make payment of contribution to provident fund or any other fund till the "due date" applicable for furnishing the return of income under sub- section(1) of section 139 of the I…

Channa Keshava, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 601/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.S.N.Shyanbhog, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Narayana K.R., Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…duction of the employees’ contribution of PF and ESI having regard to the provision to section 43B of the Act. In this context, the assessee relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT, reported in 366 ITR 408. The CIT(A) after noticing the difference between the employer’s contribution and employees’ contribution to PF and ESI held that only employer’s contribution to the PF and ESI is entitled to deduction u/s 43B of the I.T.Act, if the payments are made prior to the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) of the 3 Sri Channa Keshava. I.T.Act. Fu…

High Tensile Fastnuts (India) P..Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CPC, Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1572/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale&, Shri Gagan Goyalhigh Tensile Fastnuts Vs. Dcit – Cpc (India) Pvt Ltd., Bangalore, 601, 6Th Floor, Karnataka-560100 Goldcrest Business Park, Opposite Shreyas Cinema, Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai – 400086. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach1190D Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Mehul Shah.Ar Respondent By : Shri.Tejinder Pal Singh Anand. Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 02.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 04.03.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm:

For Appellant: Shri. Mehul Shah.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Tejinder Pal Singh
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER &, SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER High Tensile Fastnuts Vs. DCIT – CPC (India) Pvt Ltd., Bangalore, 601, 6th Floor, Karnataka-560100 Goldcrest Business Park, Opposite Shreyas Cinema, Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai – 400086. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACH1190D Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri. Mehul Shah.AR Respondent by : Shri.Tejinder Pal Singh Anand. Sr.DR Date of Hearing 02.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement 04.03.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The assessee has filed th…

Sri Marigantu Narasimha Chari, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 38/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act and it is not hit by explanation 2 to sec.36(1)(va) of the Act which calls for payment within the due date prescribed under the relevant Act. For this purpose he relied on the judgment in the case of Essac Teraoka (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 366 ITR 408 (Kar.), wherein it has held as under: “15. From bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that under the provision, for IT Act, an extension is given to the employer to make payment of contribution to provident fund or any other fund till the "due date" applicable for furnishing the return of income under sub- section(1) of section 139 of the I…

Sangrila Nutri Food Products, Kanpur vs. ITO, Ward 2(2)(3), Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 99/LKW/2021[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Mar 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2019-20

Section 139(1)Section 43B

…the view taken in the earlier judgments and follow the view taken by Gujrat High Court in Commissioner of IncomeTax Vs Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation (supra) and this occasion came in Essae Teraoka P. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of IncomeTax, (2014) 366 ITR 408. Dispute relates to A.Y. 200809. Assessee filed Return on 26.09.2008. Return was processed under Section 143(1) and thereafter on scrutiny, notice under Section 143(2) was issued. Assessing Officer completed assessment by order dated 24.12.2010 under Section 143(3) disallowing Rs. 12,51,737/ under Section 36(1)(va) and also disallowing Rs. 1,04,6…

M/S S.K. Shoes and Boots Private Limited, Kanpur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3)(5), Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 110/LKW/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Mar 2022AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2018-19

Section 43B

…he view taken in the earlier judgments and follow the view taken by Gujrat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Gujrat State Road Transport Corporation (supra) and this occasion came in Essae Teraoka P. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (2014) 366 ITR 408. Dispute relates to A.Y. 200809. Assessee filed Return on 26.09.2008. Return was processed under Section 143(1) and thereafter on scrutiny, notice under Section 143(2) was issued. I.T.A. No.110/Lkw/2021 Assessment year:2018-19 7 Assessing Officer completed assessment by order dated 24.12.2010 under Section 143(3) disallowing Rs. 12,51,737/ unde…

Puyvast Maritime India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1) Represented by Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 30/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajgopal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250Section 30Section 32Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act and it is not hit by explanation 2 to sec.36(1)(va) of the Act which calls for payment within the due date prescribed under the relevant Act. For this purpose he relied on the judgment in the case of Essac Teraoka (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT 366 ITR 408 (Kar.), wherein it has held as under: “15. From bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that under the provision, for IT Act, an extension is given to the employer to make payment of contribution to provident fund or any other fund till the "due date" applicable for furnishing the return of income under sub- section(1) of section 139 of the I…

Mangilal Padamchand, Mysore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 25/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Harish, ARFor Respondent: Sri.Narayana K.R., Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…duction of the employees’ contribution of PF and ESI having regard to the provision to section 43B of the Act. In this context, the assessee relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT, reported in 366 ITR 408. The CIT(A) after noticing the difference between the employer’s contribution and employees’ contribution to PF and ESI held that only employer’s contribution to the PF and ESI is entitled to deduction u/s 43B of the I.T.Act, if the payments are made prior to the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) of the 3 Sri Mangilal Padamchand. I.T.Ac…

M/S. Pilvo Communications Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 716/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Prashanth G.S., CAFor Respondent: Sri.Narayana K.R., Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…isallowance made is unwarranted on the facts of the case. 5. The authorities below ought to have appreciated that the payments made were allowable having regard to the judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka (P) Ltd. reported in 366 ITR 408 on the facts of the case. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or substitute any of the grounds urged above. 7. In view of the above and other grounds that may be urged at the time of the hearing of the appeal. The appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed in the interest of justice and equity.” 3. Brief facts of the case are…

N.R. Kumaraswamy, Bangalore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 26/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Smt. Mrinalini R., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36

…he material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution to ESI before the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of EssaeTeraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujar…

Vaaho Agencies Private Limited, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1 ( 1 ), Amritsar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee related all grounds of ITA No

ITA 30/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meenash. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Jatinder Arora (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Satbir Singh, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…orporation Ltd.Vs. CIT 386 ITR 410 (Patna) d. Sagun Foundary Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (All) e. CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries (2008) 358 ITR 43 (P&H) f. CIt Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj) g. Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (2014)366 ITR 408 (Kar) h. CIT Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 396 (Cal) i. CIT Vs. Kichha Sugar Co Ltd (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand) In the backdrop of the aforesaid settled position of law, we are of the considered view that the no distinction is to be drawn between the employers as well as employees contribution to PF and ESI as both are covered u/…

J.M.C Plywood, Goraya vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3, Phagwara

In the result, the disallowances confirmed by the NFAC/CIT(A) related to ITA No

ITA 4/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…orporation Ltd.Vs. CIT 386 ITR 410 (Patna) d. Sagun Foundary Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (All) e. CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries (2008) 358 ITR 43 (P&H) f. CIt Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj) g. Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (2014)366 ITR 408 (Kar) h. CIT Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 396 (Cal) i. CIT Vs. Kichha Sugar Co Ltd (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand) In the backdrop of the aforesaid settled position of law, we are of the considered view that the no distinction is to be drawn between the employers as well as employees contribution to PF and ESI as both are covered u/…

M/S Diamond Red Tanneries, Kapurthala vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, the disallowances confirmed by the NFAC/CIT(A) related to ITA No

ITA 21/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…orporation Ltd.Vs. CIT 386 ITR 410 (Patna) d. Sagun Foundary Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (All) e. CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries (2008) 358 ITR 43 (P&H) f. CIt Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj) g. Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (2014)366 ITR 408 (Kar) h. CIT Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 396 (Cal) i. CIT Vs. Kichha Sugar Co Ltd (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand) In the backdrop of the aforesaid settled position of law, we are of the considered view that the no distinction is to be drawn between the employers as well as employees contribution to PF and ESI as both are covered u/…

Khalsa Bakery, Kaputhala vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -4 (2), Jalandhar

In the result, the disallowances confirmed by the NFAC/CIT(A) related to ITA No

ITA 20/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…orporation Ltd.Vs. CIT 386 ITR 410 (Patna) d. Sagun Foundary Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT 145 DTR 265 (All) e. CIT Vs. Mark Auto Industries (2008) 358 ITR 43 (P&H) f. CIt Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (2014) 363 ITR 307 (Raj) g. Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT (2014)366 ITR 408 (Kar) h. CIT Vs. Vijay Shree Ltd (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 396 (Cal) i. CIT Vs. Kichha Sugar Co Ltd (2013) 356 ITR 351 (Uttarakhand) In the backdrop of the aforesaid settled position of law, we are of the considered view that the no distinction is to be drawn between the employers as well as employees contribution to PF and ESI as both are covered u/…

Tandem Allied Services Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 750/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Sachin Metha, ARFor Respondent: Sri.D.Kiran, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution to ESI before the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujar…

Tandem Allied Services Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 749/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Sachin Metha, ARFor Respondent: Sri.D.Kiran, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…e material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution to ESI before the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujar…

Euro Hardware World, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 753/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Ganapath Kawad H, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Priyarshini Basaganni, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…n of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI having regard to the provisions of section 43B of the I.T.Act. In this context, the assessee relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka Pvt. Ltd Vs. DCIT, reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.). The CIT(A), however, rejected the appeal of the assessee. The CIT(A) noticed the difference between employer and employee contribution to PF and ESI and held that only employers contribution to PF and ESI is 3 M/s.Euro Hardware World. entitled to deduction u/s 43B of the I.T.Act, if the same is paid prior to due date of filing of return o…

M/S. Security & Allied Services Inc., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 653/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Ajit V. Ghatikar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…he material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution to ESI before the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of EssaeTeraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujar…

M/S. Security & Allied Services Inc., Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 652/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Feb 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Ajit V. Ghatikar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…he material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution to ESI before the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of EssaeTeraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujar…

Shri. Sundar Madhukaran, Bangalore vs. Additional Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 650/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Feb 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri B.S. Balachandran, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…he material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution to ESI before the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of EssaeTeraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differed with the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Gujar…