Case Law Details
National Housing Bank Vs CIT (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT Delhi held that the deduction u/s 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act can be allowed only if the employees’ share in the provident fund and ESI fund is deposited by the employer before the due date stipulated in respective Acts.
Facts- Assessee is a financial institution stated to be engaged in the business of providing long term finance for construction or purchase of houses in India for residential purposes. Assessee filed its original return of income on 31.10.2019 for A.Y. 2019-20 declaring total income of Rs.11,42,86,93,010/-. In the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act by CPC, Bangalore and the total income was determined at Rs.11,43,03,92,370/-.
Aggrieved by the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee is now in appeal.
The assessee has raised several grounds but the sole grievance of the assessee is the additions made on account of delay in deposit of employee’s contribution towards provident fund and ESI fund by AO and upheld by CIT(A).
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
