State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd.

269 ITR 282High Court2004#547 most cited

What is State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd. authority for?

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI are deductible if deposited with the authorities before the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1), even if deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective fund's Act.

176

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,418 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2023.

Also referred to as

CIT v. GTN Textiles Ltd. · 269 ITR 282 · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 43B · employee contribution deduction · provident fund ESI · deposit due date · ITR filing due date · Section 139(1)

Judgments citing State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd.

Bikaner Ceramics Private Limited, Bikaner vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore / ACIT, Circle-1, Bikaner

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 60/JODH/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur27 Sept 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosianmohangarh Engineers & Vs The Dcit, Construction Company Circle -1, Jodhpur Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aanfm4741R

Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…he following case law. (i) CIT vs. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. GTN Textiles Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT vs. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore.” 10. On an identical issue, this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2021 in the case of Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur & Others vs CPC, Banglore in ITA No. 5/Jodh/2021 and others held vide…

Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jodhpur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 59/JODH/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur27 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosianmohangarh Engineers & Vs The Dcit, Construction Company Circle -1, Jodhpur Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aanfm4741R

Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…he following case law. (i) CIT vs. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. GTN Textiles Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT vs. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore.” 10. On an identical issue, this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2021 in the case of Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur & Others vs CPC, Banglore in ITA No. 5/Jodh/2021 and others held vide…

C G Technosoft Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, Bengaluru

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 52/JODH/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur27 Sept 2021AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Arun Chordia, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…e following case law. (i) CIT vs. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. GTN Textiles Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT vs. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore.” 10. On an identical issue, this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2021 in the case of Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur & Others vs CPC, Banglore in ITA No. 5/Jodh/2021 and others held vide…

C.G. Technosoft Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Jodhpur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 49/JODH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur27 Sept 2021AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Arun Chordia, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…e following case law. (i) CIT vs. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. GTN Textiles Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT vs. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore.” 10. On an identical issue, this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2021 in the case of Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur & Others vs CPC, Banglore in ITA No. 5/Jodh/2021 and others held vide…

M/S Mplex Networks Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(4), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3371/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Joijode, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(iv)

…m Ltd. [2015] 61 taxmann.com 119 / 235 Taxmann 378 / 378 ITR 443 (Ker) (ii) CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn. [2014] 366 ITR 170 (Guj) (iii) CIT v. South India Corpn. Ltd. [2000] 108 Taxman 322 / 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT v. GTN Textiles Ltd. [2004] 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT v. Jairam & Sons [2004] 134 Taxman 503 / 269 ITR 285 (Ker) 12. Accordingly, this issue is remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer to verify whether the above contribution towards provident fund has been made within the due date of filing the return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act and thereafter the AO has to pass fresh assess…

M/S Mplex Networks Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3370/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Joijode, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139(1)Section 36(1)(iv)

…m Ltd. [2015] 61 taxmann.com 119 / 235 Taxmann 378 / 378 ITR 443 (Ker) (ii) CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn. [2014] 366 ITR 170 (Guj) (iii) CIT v. South India Corpn. Ltd. [2000] 108 Taxman 322 / 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT v. GTN Textiles Ltd. [2004] 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT v. Jairam & Sons [2004] 134 Taxman 503 / 269 ITR 285 (Ker) 12. Accordingly, this issue is remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer to verify whether the above contribution towards provident fund has been made within the due date of filing the return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act and thereafter the AO has to pass fresh assess…

Ridhi Sidhi Mills (India) Pvt. Ltd., Pali vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 72/JODH/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…he following case law. (i) CIT vs. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. GTN Textiles Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT vs. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore.” 10. On an identical issue, this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2021 in the case of Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur & Others vs CPC, Banglore in ITA No. 5/Jodh/2021 and others held vide…

Ridhi Sidhi Mills (India) Pvt. Ltd., Pali vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 71/JODH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…he following case law. (i) CIT vs. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. GTN Textiles Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT vs. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore.” 10. On an identical issue, this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2021 in the case of Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur & Others vs CPC, Banglore in ITA No. 5/Jodh/2021 and others held vide…

Manibhadra Udhyog, Pali vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 70/JODH/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosainassessment Year : 2017-18 Manibhadra Udhyog, Vs. The Dcit, Pali Cpc, Banglore Pan No: Aagfm4258G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Amit Kothari, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.09.2021 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…he following case law. (i) CIT vs. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. GTN Textiles Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT vs. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore.” 9. On an identical issue, this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2021 in the case of Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur & Others vs CPC, Banglore in ITA No. 5/Jodh/2021 and others held vide…

Swarup Ram, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Jodhpur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 66/JODH/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Akash Phophalia, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…he following case law. (i) CIT vs. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. GTN Textiles Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT vs. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore.” 10. On an identical issue, this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2021 in the case of Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur & Others vs CPC, Banglore in ITA No. 5/Jodh/2021 and others held vide…

Swarup Ram, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Jodhpur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 65/JODH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Akash Phophalia, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…he following case law. (i) CIT vs. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. GTN Textiles Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT vs. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore.” 10. On an identical issue, this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2021 in the case of Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur & Others vs CPC, Banglore in ITA No. 5/Jodh/2021 and others held vide…

Inder Bahadur Gurung, Jodhpur vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, ITO, W-3(2), Ju

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 55/JODH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosainassessment Year : 2018-19 Mohan Ram Chaudhary, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur Pan No: Acgpc8070L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Muthia Muruganantham, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur Pan No: Abipm1535F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Inder Bahadur Gurung, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(1), Jodhpur Pan No: Aempg9230N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Taparia and Miss Divya, CAsFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…he following case law. (i) CIT vs. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. GTN Textiles Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT vs. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore.” 10. On an identical issue, this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2021 in the case of Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur & Others vs CPC, Banglore in ITA No. 5/Jodh/2021 and others held vide…

Muthia Muruganantham, Jodhpur vs. Jurisdicational Assessing Officer, ITO Ward-3(1), Jodhpur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 54/JODH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosainassessment Year : 2018-19 Mohan Ram Chaudhary, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur Pan No: Acgpc8070L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Muthia Muruganantham, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur Pan No: Abipm1535F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Inder Bahadur Gurung, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(1), Jodhpur Pan No: Aempg9230N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Taparia and Miss Divya, CAsFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…he following case law. (i) CIT vs. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. GTN Textiles Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT vs. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore.” 10. On an identical issue, this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2021 in the case of Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur & Others vs CPC, Banglore in ITA No. 5/Jodh/2021 and others held vide…

Mohan Ram Chaudhary, Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), Jodhpur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 51/JODH/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Sept 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri Sandeep Gosainassessment Year : 2018-19 Mohan Ram Chaudhary, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur Pan No: Acgpc8070L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Muthia Muruganantham, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(2), Jodhpur Pan No: Abipm1535F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr Assessment Year : 2018-19 Inder Bahadur Gurung, Vs. The Ito, Jodhpur Ward 3(1), Jodhpur Pan No: Aempg9230N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Taparia & Miss Divya, Cas. Revenue By : Smt. Monisha, Jcit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Taparia and Miss Divya, CAsFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha, JCIT DR
Section 2Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43Section 43B

…he following case law. (i) CIT vs. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (2014) 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT vs. South India Corporation Ltd. (2000) 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT vs. GTN Textiles Ltd. (2004) 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT vs. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore.” 10. On an identical issue, this Bench of the Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2021 in the case of Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Company, Jodhpur & Others vs CPC, Banglore in ITA No. 5/Jodh/2021 and others held vide…

DCIT, Circle-II, Allahabad vs. Bharat Pumps & Compressors Ltd, Allahabad

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue for ay: 2007-08 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 148/ALLD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad12 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shantanu Dhamija, CIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(va)

…d by the following case law. (i) CIT v. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [2014] 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd. [2000] 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT v. GTN Textiles Ltd. [2004] 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT v. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) 3. The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore. 4. This assessee's appeal is allowed.” We have observed that Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sagun Foundry Private Limited (supra) has held that deduction is to be allowed for belated payment of employe…

DCIT, Circle-II, Allahabad vs. Bharat Pumps & Compressors Ltd, Allahabad

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue for ay: 2007-08 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 147/ALLD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad12 Aug 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Tanu Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Shantanu Dhamija, CIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(va)

…d by the following case law. (i) CIT v. Merchem Ltd, [2015] 378 ITR 443(Ker) (ii) CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [2014] 366 ITR 170 (Guj.) (iii) CIT v. South India Corporation Ltd. [2000] 242 ITR 114 (Ker) (iv) CIT v. GTN Textiles Ltd. [2004] 269 ITR 282 (Ker) (v) CIT v. Jairam & Sons [2004] 269 ITR 285 (Ker) 3. The impugned ESI/PF disallowance is directed to be deleted therefore. 4. This assessee's appeal is allowed.” We have observed that Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sagun Foundry Private Limited (supra) has held that deduction is to be allowed for belated payment of employe…