Ajeet Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur)
ITAT held that the amendment brought in the statue i.e., by Finance Act, 2021, the provisions of Section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the Act amended by inserting explanation 2 is prospective and not retrospective. Hence, the amended provisions of Section 43B r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act are not applicable for the assessment year under consideration i.e. 2018-19 but will apply from assessment year 2021-22 and subsequent assessment years. Hence, this issue raised in assessee’s appeal is allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT JAIPUR
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as (NFAC)] dated 22.09.2021for the AY 2017-18.
2. The assessee has raised the following grounds:-
“1. On facts and in the circumstance of the matter Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 12,84,590/- made u/s 36(va) r.w.s 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for delayed deposit of employees’ contribution towards PF and ESIC. Appellant prays that such delayed contribution being covered within the provisions of sec 43B of the Act are allowable if paid before the due date of filing of return, and thus addition made deserve to be deleted;
1.1 That Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in confirming the disallowance, based on the amendments made in sec 36(1) and sec 43B of the Act by The Finance bill 202021, when the said amendments are prospective and applicable w.e.f. 01.04.2021. Appellant prays such reliance placed being unjustified; addition made deserves to be deleted;
1.2 That Ld. CIT(A) has also erred in not following the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court and jurisdictional High courts on the matter that are binding on him. Appellant prays that such disallowance being unwarranted, the addition made deserves to be deleted.
2. That the appellant craves the right to add, delete, amend or abandon any grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of appeal.”
3. None has appeared on behalf of the assessee, however Bench has decided to dispose of the appeal ex-parte based on the material available on record. The only grievance of the assessee relates to the disallowance of Rs. 12,84,586/- made by the A.O on account of late payments towards PF and ESI under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the ‘Act’), however, before furnishing the return of income under section 139(1) of the Act. When the matter was taken to the Ld. CIT(A) the said disallowance was sustained.
4. Being aggrieved by the impugned order issued U/s 143(1) of the IT Act, the assessee is preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee filed complete details of the entire payments i.e. employee’s PF & ESI contribution paid before the due date of filing of return of income which are produced in CIT(A) order:-
“Details of deposition of P.F.
