← All Phrases

“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 Nova Iron and Steel Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-1, Chandigarh

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 303/CHANDI/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Filing Of Income Tax Return.

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA and Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 253Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING

Indo-Mim Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 596/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.595 596/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 & 2020-21) Indo-Mim Ltd Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 2(1) Pan:Aabci0484L Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 26/08/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

assessee further submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services (P) Ltd has considered the issue of employees contribution to PF & ESI, whereas in the present case, the issue was contribution to welfare funds like ESI/Gratuity and other welfare funds and said funds are contributed

Tgv Projects and Investments Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 491/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.491/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Tgv Projects & Vs. Income Tax Officer Investments (P) Ltd Ward – 2 ( 3 ) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaact8340H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.K. Gupta, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 13/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 20/08/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 44A

debited to P&L Account for Rs.68,49,140/-, adhoc disallowances of staff welfare expenses of Rs.4,41,383/- and also disallowance of employees contribution to PF u/s 2(24)(x) r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for Rs.54,745/-. 4. On appeal, the learned

Mahantesh H, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 4(1)(1), Bangalore)

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

ITA 874/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Aug 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeymahantesh H Dcit, Circe 4(1)(1) #6, Poojari Krishan Bldg. Koramangala Bhavani Road, Hebbagodi Vs. Bengaluru Bangalore 560099 Pan – Aoypm2771G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Subramanya Bhat, Ca Revenue By: Shri V. Parithivel, Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.08.2024 O R D E R Per: Keshav Dubey, J.M.

For Appellant: Shri Subramanya Bhat, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

s.43B of the Act confirmed the addition made on account of delayed payment of 3 Mahantesh H employees’ contribution to PF and ESI of Rs.50,23,277/- and accordingly dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A) the assessee has filed the present appeal before ... Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. (supra) submitted that the deduction u/s. 36(1)(va) in respect of delayed deposit of amount collected towards employees contribution to PF and ESI cannot be claimed when deposited after the due date as per the PF & ESI Act even though it is deposited within

Manojit Choudhury, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-30(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 753/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Aug 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.753/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22

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

relief may be granted to assessee in accordance with law and secondly the AO should also examine the due dates of deposit of employees contribution to PF & ESI falling in the period mentioned in the circular issued by ESIC on 01.01.2021 and EPFO on 15.05.2020 and if they fall

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Napc Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

ITA 623/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Hon'Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon'Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 623/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1) No. 46, M.G. Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : V. : Shri. : Shri. : 01.07.2024 : 14.08.2024 Napc Pvt Ltd., No.3, 6Th Floor, Apex Plaza, Nungambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam – 600 034. [Pan: Aaccn-3625-P] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) V. Nandakumar, Cit T. Banusekar, Advocate & Shri. Suraj Nahar, Ca आदेश /Order Per S. R. Raghunatha: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Filed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19, For The

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 41(1)Section 43C

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'बी 'न्यायपीठ,चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री मनु कुमार गिरि, न्यायिक

Chalasani Hospitals Pvt Ltd, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed and the cross objection of the revenue is allowed

ITA 315/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.315/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) Chalasani Hospitals (P.) Ltd., V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle – 1(1) D.No. 50-53-14, Gurudwara Lane Income Tax Office Seethammadhara Direct Taxes Building Visakhapatnam – 530013 Mvp Colony, Visakhapatnam -530017 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan :Aaecc0005G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

after enhancing the total income at Rs.4,94,23,415/- with respect to disallowances on delayed payment of Employees Contribution to PF and ESI payments. Subsequently, the Page No. 2 I.T.A. No. 315/VIZ/2023 & C.O. No. 02/VIZ/2024 Chalasani Hospitals (P.) Ltd., case was selected for complete scrutiny for verifying the following

Sfc Soultions India (Fluid) Private Limited, Chengalpattu vs. ACIT Corp. Circle 1(2), Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 9/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.9/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/S.Sfc Solutions India (Fluid) Pvt. Ltd. Acit [Formerly Known As Cooper Standard Automotive Corporate Circle-1(2) India Pvt.Ltd.] Chennai. बनाम/ 3A,Ford Supplier Park,Killakarani Vs. Village,Melrosapuram Post Via Singaperumal Koil -603 204. Chengalpattu. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aabcc-3665-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Sumant Chadha (Fca)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar(Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 31-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sumant Chadha (FCA)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar(CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 37Section 43B

accounting standards and is a deductible expense under Section 37 of the Act in the year of its accrual. Ground No.2: Disallowance of employees contribution to PF and ESIC amounting to Rs.30,61,363/-. 2.1 On the facts and in circumstances of the case ... impacting the assessee's adversely. As is evident, two issues fall for our consideration i.e., (i) disallowance of warranty expenses; & (ii) disallowance of Employees’ contribution towards PF & ESI. 3. The Ld. AR advanced arguments with the help of documents as placed in the paper book

DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai vs. Evita Construction Pvt. Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3914/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Dcit, Central Circle-1(2) Evita Construction Pvt. Limited 906, Pratishtha Bhavan, 514, Dalal Tower 211, Vs. Old Cgo Building, M K Road, Fpj Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 021 Pan/Gir No. Aabce 7779 C (Assessee) : (Respondent) : Shri Pradip Kapasi Assessee By Respondent By : Shri P. D. Chougule : 16.05.2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 12.08.2024

For Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

addition u/s. 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act amounting to Rs.2,36,769/- on the delayed deposits of employees contribution to PF. 4. Aggrieved the assessee was in appeal before the first appellate authority, who vide order dated 01.08.2023 had deleted the addition on the interest

Guardian India Operations Private Limited, Chennai vs. PCIT 1, Chennai

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

ITA 842/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Ashik ShahFor Respondent: Shri. V. Nandakumar, IRS,CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, बी, "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनु

Adani Hazira Port Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Adani Hazira Port Private Ltd.), Ahmedabad vs. The AO, CPC, Banglore Present Juridiction the DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 25/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80C

prima facie adjustment and a communication was sent to the assessee as to why not disallow Rs.29,85,612/- being belated payment of Employees contribution to PF Fund. The assessee replied that it paid the employees contribution to National Pension Scheme before the due date of filing of the Return

Adani Petronet( Dahej) Port Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The AO, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 343/AHD/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

prima facie adjustment and a communication was sent to the assessee as to why not disallow Rs.8,19,544/- being belated payment of Employees contribution to PF Fund. The assessee replied that it paid the employees contribution to National Pension Scheme before the due date of filing of the Return

Ultimate International Private Limited, Delhi vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangaluru, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2780/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

Ultimate International Pvt. Ltd. 3. Aggrieved with the disallowance made u/s 143(1) with regard to delay in payment of employees contribution to PF account, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who affirmed the order of the CPC disallowing the amount u/s 2(24)(x) r.w.s

Reliable Automotive Private Limited, Mumbai vs. CIT(A), Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Coimbatore

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4479/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Jm Reliable Automotive Private Cit (A), Addl/ Jcit (A)-1 Limited Circle 15(3)(1), Room Plot No. 29, Sector 1, No.460, Vs. 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Shirwane Gaon, Nerul, Navi Mumbai-400 706 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca9737D

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Meshram, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)

u/s.36(1) (va) read with section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, on the ground of delays in payment of employees contribution to PF & ESIC ignoring the fact that: a) Payment aggregating to Rs.33,02,620/- were paid within due date prescribed under the Provident Fund and Employee

M/S Asha Technologies, Kala Amb vs. ITO, Sirmour

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

ITA 61/CHANDI/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Aditya Sood, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 80I

Manoj Gupta, C A vide which copies of Audit Report in Form No.3CB & 3CD, Annexure to Form No.3CD, schedule of fixed assets, employees contribution to PF and ESI, Annexure, Part-A & B, Annexure regarding Fringe Benefit tax, Balance Sheet, Manufacturing & Trading Account, P&L Account, Capital Account, list of sundry

M/S Asha Technologies, Sirmour vs. Addl. CIT, Solan

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed as aforesaid in respect of impugned orders dt

ITA 388/CHANDI/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Aditya Sood, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 80I

Manoj Gupta, C A vide which copies of Audit Report in Form No.3CB & 3CD, Annexure to Form No.3CD, schedule of fixed assets, employees contribution to PF and ESI, Annexure, Part-A & B, Annexure regarding Fringe Benefit tax, Balance Sheet, Manufacturing & Trading Account, P&L Account, Capital Account, list of sundry

M/S. Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The ADIT, CPC, Bangalore Present Juridiction the Dy. CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 69/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 69/Ahd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20) िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. Checkmate Adit, Cpc, बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Services Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore Vs. G.F 6-9, Amaan Tower & Suvas Colony, Fatehgunj, Dy.Cit Vadodara, Gujarat, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara 390002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc8465A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri M. R. Sahu, Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit. Dr 12/07/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 16/07/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 08.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That Assessee Had Filed Its Return Of Income For A.Y. 2019-20 On 30.09.2019 Declaring Total

For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

While processing the return an adjustment of Rs.5,87,43,293/- was made by the CPC on account of delay in deposit of employees’ contribution to PF & ESI as mentioned in the tax audit report filed by the assessee. 3. The assessee had preferred an appeal before the First Appellate ... sustaining the addition of Rs. 5,87,43,291/- made u/s 36(1)(va) in the intimation without appreciating the fact that employees contribution to PF and ESI are treated as 'Deemed Income' u/s.2(24)(x) in the books of accounts and not being deposited within the due dates specified

Sankalp Engineering and Services Private Limited, Pune vs. ACIT, Circle 10, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 249/PUN/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jul 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Paresh ShapariaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 56(2)(ia)Section 68

dismissing the ground regarding disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of Rs.24,01,326/- on account of delayed payment as per relevant Acts for employees contribution to PF & ESIC. It was contended that such payments were made prior to the due dates of filing of return of income

Tukaram Mahadev Suryavanshi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Office, Ward 4(5), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 785/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.785/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Tukaram Mahadev Vs. Ito, Ward-4(5), Pune. Suryavanshi, 210 Ruby Industrial Premises Soc. Ltd., Chincholi Bandar, Mindspace, Malad West, Mumbai- 400064. Pan : Afops1105F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Anil Topiwala Revenue By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastava Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.07.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.03.2024 Passed By Ld Addl./Jacit(A), Kanpur For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Addl/Jcit(A) Kanpur-Nfac Has Erred In Confirming The Learned Assistant Director Of Income-Tax Cpc- Bangalore Order Disallowing The Sum Of Rs. 55,10,270/- U/S 36 (1)(Va) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Being Employees Contribution To Provident Fund & Esic As Per Tax Audit Report Deposited

For Appellant: Shri Anil TopiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

account of disallowing the amount of Rs.55,10,270/- representing the late deposit of amounts pertaining to amount of employees contribution to PF and ESIC, despite the same having been paid before the due date of filing the return of income. 4. Being aggrieved with the action of the Assessing ... passed by CPC Bengaluru, disallowing the sum of Rs.55,10,270/- u/s 36(1)(va) of the IT Act being employees contribution to PF & ESIC on the basis of payment of the same beyond the due dates specified under PF & ESIC laws, as mentioned in the audit report furnished along

Lodha Hospital and Research Center, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, WD 6(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove with no orders as to costs

ITA 86/JPR/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: The Ao That There Is Mistake In The Schedule Of Pf & Esi In The Audit Report By Putting The Higher Figure Without Considering The Reply Of Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

payment 1st day of each payment instead of 15th day of each month in the month of March,2021, the sum received from employees contribution to PF is incorrectly reported at Rs.2,35,495/- instead of Rs.23,595/-. Thus the correct amount of employees contribution towards PF is only Rs.2 ... account is also placed on record at PBP 26-54. Thus according to the assessee, there is no delay in payment of the employees contribution to PF & ESI. 4.3 On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the order of the ld. Addl. CIT(A). 5 LODHA HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE