Case Law Details
Giri Bahadur Vs Ward (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai held that amendment to section 36(1)(va) is not applicable to A.Y. 2017-2018. Accordingly, as the employees contribution to provident fund is deposited before the due date u/s. 139(1) of the Act, the same cannot be disallowed.
Facts- Vide the present appeal, the appellant mainly contested that CIT(A) has erred in disallowing the employees’ contribution to Provident Fund (PF) and Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) being statutory obligation discharged by Appellant before filing of return of income.
Conclusion- Held that the amendment was brought in Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f 01.04.2021. The law was not framed/amended in the relevant Assessment year and any legal proposition which cast additional burden/liability on the assessee cannot be implemented retrospectively. We considering the overall facts, circumstances, judicial decisions, are of the reasoned view that the amendment to section 36(1)(va) of the Act will not be applicable to Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee has deposited the employees contribution of provident fund before the due date u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Accordingly, we set-aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and direct the assessing officer to delete the disallowance and allow the grounds of appeal in favour of the assessee.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
