“employees contribution to PF”

DisallowancesSection 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(va)638 judgments

The decision most relied on for employees contribution to PF is CIT v. AIMIL Ltd. (321 ITR 508), cited in 1,629 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on employees contribution to PF

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.

321 ITR 508 · 2010 · High Court

1,629

citing judgments

Employee contributions to PF and ESIC, deposited beyond the due date under the respective Acts but within the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1), are allowable deductions under Section 36(1)(va). Such disallowance cannot be made during processing under Section 143(1).

Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

143 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · Supreme Court

1,392

citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund and ESI deposited by an employer beyond the due dates prescribed under the respective special Acts are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Such disallowance can be made during processing under section 143(1).

CIT v. Alom Extrusions Ltd.

319 ITR 306 · 2009 · Supreme Court

1,344

citing judgments

A proviso inserted into a section to remedy unintended consequences, make the section workable, or supply an obvious omission must be read retrospectively in operation to give effect to the section as a whole.

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation

366 ITR 170 · 2014 · High Court

1,158

citing judgments

Employees' contributions to welfare funds, such as provident fund, are not allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) if deposited beyond the due date prescribed under the respective welfare statutes, even by a single day. Such delayed deposits are not cured even if made before the income-tax return filing due date.

(i) CIT v. Merchem Ltd.

378 ITR 443 · 2015 · High Court

631

citing judgments

Belated remittance of employees' contribution to ESI and PF, even if deposited before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1), is not allowed as a deduction. This disallowance falls under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x), as Section 43B applies only to employer's contributions.

CIT v. Ghatge Patil Transports Ltd.

368 ITR 749 · 2014 · High Court

609

citing judgments

Deduction for employees' contributions to PF and ESIC is allowable under Section 43B if paid before the due date for filing the return under Section 139(1); similarly, delayed deposits of employers' contributions to ESIC and PF are also allowable.

CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn

41 Taxmann.com 100 · 2014 · High Court

540

citing judgments

Employees' contributions to provident fund or other welfare funds are deductible under section 36(1)(va) only if paid by the due date specified in the respective welfare fund enactments, and section 43B does not extend this period to the income tax return filing due date under section 139(1).

CIT v. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur

43 Taxmann.com 411 · 2014 · High Court

524

citing judgments

Employee contributions to provident fund, ESI, and other welfare funds, if deposited by the due date for furnishing the return of income under Section 139(1), are allowable as a deduction and cannot be disallowed under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) or Section 43B, even if deposited after the due date prescribed by the respective welfare Acts.

Judgments citing employees contribution to PF

M/S. Nalpak Restaurants, Mysuru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Mysore

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

ITA 10/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year:2019-20

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on M/s. Nalpak Restaurants, Mysuru Page 2 of 6 the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. 3. The assessee challenged the above ... Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before me. 4. The learned AR submitted that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contribution was paid in few instances beyond the due date prescribed

M/S. Hexagon Global It Services Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 685/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year:2019-20

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

Bangalore Page 2 of 6 Act, wherein the disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. 3. The assessee challenged the above ... Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before me. 4. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. The assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contribution was paid in few instances beyond

Brindavan Roller Flour Mills Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 680/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year:2018-19

For Appellant: Sri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

wherein the disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been Brindavan Roller Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 2 of 6 paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts ... Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before me. 4. The learned AR submitted that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contribution was paid in few instances beyond the due date prescribed

Suresha, Ududpi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 70/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

Udupi Page 2 of 6 Ac, wherein the disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. 3. The assessee challenged the above ... Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before me. 4. The learned AR submitted that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contributions were paid in few instances beyond the due date prescribed

Hattigowda Narasegowda, Bengaluru vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(2)(1) Through the Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 5/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year:2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Joseph Verghese, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on Hattigowda Narasegowda, Bangalore Page 2 of 6 the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. 3. The assessee challenged the above said ... certain other decisions. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before us. 4. The learned AR submitted that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contributions were paid in few instances beyond

Chandramouli, Mysuru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 4/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Sachin H.S., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

wherein the disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. 3. The assessee challenged the above said additions by filing appeals ... both the years. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed these appeals before me. 4. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contributions were paid in few instances beyond

Chandramouli, Mysore vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 3/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Sachin H.S., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

M/S. Brush Tech India, Mysuru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 2/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Sachin H.S., A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

Mysuru Page 2 of 6 Ac, wherein the disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. 3. The assessee challenged the above ... Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before us. 4. The learned AR submitted that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contributions were paid in few instances beyond the due date prescribed

Shantha Rao Gujju, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 158/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

wherein the disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. 3. The assessee challenged the above said additions by filing appeals ... behalf of the assessee. However, it has been observed from the orders passed by Ld CIT(A) that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contributions were paid in few instances beyond

Shantha Rao Gujju, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 157/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: N O N EFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

wherein the disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. 3. The assessee challenged the above said additions by filing appeals ... behalf of the assessee. However, it has been observed from the orders passed by Ld CIT(A) that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contributions were paid in few instances beyond

Cheruvathur Veetil Damodaran, Mysuru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 678/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri B. Parthasarathy, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

wherein the disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. 3. The assessee challenged the above said addition by filing appeal ... Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before me. 4. The learned AR submitted that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contributions were paid in few instances beyond the due date prescribed

Sulthan Mohammed Ismail, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 673/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

wherein the disallowances u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act were made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. The rectification request filed for AY 2019-20 was also rejected ... Aggrieved, the assessee has filed these appeals before me. 4. The learned AR submitted that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contributions were paid in few instances beyond the due date prescribed

Sulthan Mohammed Ismail, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 672/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

Mangalore Security Services Private Limited, Mangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & Tps, Udupi

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

ITA 61/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Anil Dsouza, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

made on Mangalore Security Services Pvt. Ltd., Mangalore Page 2 of 6 the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. Subsequently, the assessee filed a rectification petition ... Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before us. 4. The learned AR submitted that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contributions were paid in few instances beyond the due date prescribed

M/S. Lakhotia Belting Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax, Ward, 4(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 100/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Kedar Paranjape, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing counsel for dept

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

wherein the disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act was made on the ground that the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been paid by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed in the respective Acts. 3. The assessee challenged the above said addition by filing appeal ... Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before us. 4. The learned AR submitted that the assessee has remitted the employees contribution of PF & ESI before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act, even though the contributions were paid in few instances beyond the due date prescribed

M/S. Elite India Constructions Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer-Ward-2(1)(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 104/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Vp & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.V.Sudhindranath, ARFor Respondent: Sri.Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

assessed income u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act was on account of disallowance of sum of Rs.23,21,091 being late remittance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under the respective Acts. 4. Aggrieved by the intimation u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before ... first appellate authority. It was stated that the assessee had paid the employees’ contribution to PF and ESI prior to the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. Therefore, it was submitted that the assessee is entitled to deduction of employees’ contribution to PF

Borchers India Chemicals P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ITO-Ward-25(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1354/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Us: “1. (A) The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Jurisdiction Exercised By Centralized Processing Centre Under Section 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act') Involving Allowability Of Claim On Account Of Delayed Payment Of Employees' Contribution To Provident Fund (Under The Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952) Under Section 36(L)(Va) Of The Act.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: C.T. Mathews

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 234BSection 234CSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43b

ITA No.1354/Mum/2021 A.Y.2018-19 1 Borchers India chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The ITO, Ward 25(2)(1) IN THE INCOME TAX

Bengaluru International Group of Service, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 648/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Bengaluru International Group Of Service, The Assistant Site No. 4 & 12, Sy.No. 96/1, Director Of Income Near South Ridge Apartment, Tax, Jakkur, Cpc, Bangalore – 560 064. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aalfb2496G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Prabhakar .K.R, Ca : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. Revenue By Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 31-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-03-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal By The Assessee Has Been Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 01.10.2021 U/S. 250 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Herein After Called Cit(A), Is Opposed To Law, Evidences, Probabilities & Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 2. The Learned Cit(Appeals) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Amounting To Rs.79,99,158/- Made By The Assistant Director Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru, (Ao For Short) In Respect Of The Claim Towards Employees'

For Appellant: Shri Prabhakar .K.R, CA

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

return was processed u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act. In the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the CPC disallowed the employees' contribution to PF and ESI to the tune of Rs. 79,99,158/-. The reason for making the disallowance was that the assessee did not remit ... employees' contribution to PF and ESI within the due date specified under the respective Acts. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), it was submitted that the assessee remitted the employees contribution to PF and ESI before the due date of filing

Ashwin Shetty, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 600/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Ashwin Shetty, The Assistant No. 63/A, 13Th Cross, Commissioner Of J.P. Nagar 3Rd Phase, Income Tax, Bangalore – 560 078. Cpc, Pan: Anaps7985B Vs. Bangalore. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S.N. Shyanbhag, Advocate : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. Revenue By Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 17-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-03-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal By The Assessee Has Been Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 09.09.2021 U/S. 250 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2018-19 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Appeals Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.16,11,013/-Being Belated Payment Of Employees Contribution Of Esi & Pf Paid Before Due Date For Filing The Return Of Income & An Amount Of Rs.18,362/- Being Club Expenses Incurred By The Employees Made By The A.O. Cpc In 143(1) Proceedings. 2. The Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Amendment By Way Explanation 2 To Section 36(1) (Va) & Explanation 5 To The Section 43B Made In The Finance Act 2021 Has Retrospective Effect As Such The Decisions Relied On By The Appellant Are Not Applicable.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Shyanbhag, Advocate

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

return was processed u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act. In the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the I.T.Act, the CPC disallowed the employees' contribution to PF and ESI to the tune of Rs. 16,11,013/-. The reason for making the disallowance was that the assessee did not remit ... employees' contribution to PF and ESI within the due date specified under the respective Acts. Further sum of Rs. 18,362/- also stood disallowed being club expenses incurred for its employees. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), it was submitted that

Smt. P. Kavitha, Legal Representative of Late Sri. P. Gopinatha Reddy, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 666/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Joseph Varghese, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

solitary issue raised in these appeals is, whether the CIT(A) is justified in upholding the order of the A.O. in disallowing employees’ contribution to PF & ESI, which was paid before the due date of filing of the return of income u/s 139(1) of the I.T.Act. 3. The brief ... account of disallowance of Rs.38,85,980 (for A.Y. A.Y.2018-2019) and Rs.13,02,627 (for A.Y. 2019-2020) being late remittance of employees’ contribution to PF and ESI under the respective Acts. 4. For assessment year 2018-2019, the assessee has filed a rectification application u/s 154 of the I.T.Act