Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

S. 43B Employees contributions to EPF/ESIC beyond due dates specified in relevant statutes, but before due date of filing ROI allowable

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2013 taxguru.in 955
Case Name
The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s Kichha Sugar Company Ltd. (Uttarakhand High Court at Nainital)
Advertisement


Due date referred to in section 36(1)(va) of the Act must be read in conjunction with section 43B(b) of the Act and a reading of the same would make it amply clear that the due date as mentioned in Section 36(1)(va), is the due date as mentioned in section 43B(b) i.e. payment/contribution made to the Provident Fund Authority any time before filing the return for the year in which the liability to pay accrued alongwith evidence to establish payment thereof. The Assessing Officer proceeded on the basis that due date”, as mentioned in section 36(1)(va) of the Act, is the due date fixed by the Provident Fund Authority, whereas in the matter of culling out the meaning of the word “due date”, as mentioned in the said section, the Assessing Officer was required to take note of Section 43B(b) of the Act and by not taking note of the provisions contained therein committed gross error, which having been rectified by the Appellate Authority and confirmed by the Tribunal, there is no scope of interference.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Income Tax Appeal No. 50 of 2009

The Commissioner of Income Tax

Versus

M/s Kichha Sugar Company Ltd.

JUDGMENT

Coram: Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J.  Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J.

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.