Case Law Details
CIT Vs M/s. Harrisons Malayalam Ltd. (Kerala High Court)
Conclusion: Deduction under Section 36(1)(va) with regard to Employees’ Provident Fund, Labour Welfare Fund and Employees’ State Insurance was not allowable where contribution had been made after the due date prescribed in the respective enactments.
Held:
Assessee was a company engaged in the manufacture/production of tea, rubber etc. The issue arose for consideration was whether delayed payments made to Employees’ Provident Fund, Labour Welfare Fund and Employees’ State Insurance was allowable as deduction under Section 36(1)(va). It was held in order to claim the benefit of deduction under Section 36(1)(va), payment of employees’ contribution to Employees’ Provident Fund, Labour Welfare Fund and Employees’ State Insurance has to be made before the due date prescribed under the relevant statute. In the present case, Tribunal had found that payments had to be made only before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) for filing return of income to claim the benefit u/s 36(1)(va). The finding of the Tribunal in this regard was liable to be set aside. Since assessee had got no plea that the remittance of employees’ contribution to Employees’ Provident Fund, Labour Welfare Fund, Employees’ State Insurance had been made before the due date prescribed in the respective enactments, therefore, the direction given by Tribunal remitting this issue for reconsideration by AO was liable to be set aside.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGMENT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
They should allow some grace period. Many times the PF sites are not operative in the last minute causing a delay of one or two days.
Is there any judgement allowing a grace period after the due date?