Income Tax : Understand Section 43B(h) of the Income Tax Act, MSME classification, payment timelines, tax disallowance, interest on delays, and...
Income Tax : Finance Act, 2023, has inserted section 43B(h) to facilitate timely payments to MSMEs by withholding deduction on account of delay...
Corporate Law : Learn how MSME Samadhaan helps small businesses file delayed payment claims and check status online. Explore application process, ...
Income Tax : Section 43B(h) mandates timely payment to MSMEs for tax deduction eligibility. Delayed payments will only be deductible after actu...
Income Tax : Understand Section 43B(h) of the Income Tax Act on timely payments to MSEs, its applicability, time limit, consequences, and manda...
CA, CS, CMA : Explore recent updates on corporate tax rates, MSME concerns over tax deductions, and GST rates for shawls as addressed in Lok Sab...
Income Tax : Punjab Accountants Association urges Finance Minister to amend Section 43(B)(h) for MSMEs, proposing better payment timelines and ...
Income Tax : Discover how proposed amendment in Section 43B of Income Tax Act, 1961, affects MSMEs. Learn about potential challenges and sugges...
Income Tax : Live Webinar with Book on Section 43B(h) (Financial Fitness) on 10th May 2024, 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm. CA Manoj Lamba will break down ...
Income Tax : Explore how the new 43 B (h) clause of the IT Act impacts Kerala Textiles and Garments Dealers Welfare Association and their appea...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that head office expenditure incurred outside India exclusively for the Indian branches does not fall within the ...
Income Tax : Pune ITAT condonès 191-day delay in tax appeal after assessment order email went to spam; remits case for merits review, citing j...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune held that delay in filing of an appeal before CIT(A) condoned due to company’s financial position and non-pursuing of ...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that no disallowance under Section 43B of the Act can be made when deduction is not claimed in the profit and ...
Income Tax : The assessee company, engaged in the business of real estate, having multiple ongoing projects of construction and also selling up...
Income Tax : Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has recently issued a crucial notification concerning the payment of interest on loans to Non...
Corporate Law : Explore how the recent policy update impacts MSMEs and traders regarding delayed payment benefits under the MSMED Act, 2006. Insig...
Income Tax : Disallowances made under sections 32, 40(a)(ia), 40A(3), 43B, etc. of the Act and other specific disallowances, related to the bus...
Income Tax : Income Tax Circular No. 22/2015 W.c.f. 1.4.1988, the settled position is that if the assessee deposits any sum payable by it by wa...
Income Tax : Whether the liability has been deferred or not has to be considered not from the simplistic point of the term 'defer' but in conte...
ITO, Bharuch Vs The Ankleshwar Taluka ONGC (ITAT Ahmedabad)- It is pertinent to note that in the assessment order, the AO disallowed the entire payment made to the farmers amounting to Rs.2,57,62,253/- by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(i) of he IT Act. Apart from this, the AO disallowed Rs. 51,47,250/- under Section 40A(3) of the Act. Thus, the disallowance of Rs.51,47,250/- was made twice i.e. once under Section 40A(3) and then invoking section 40(a(ia).
After going through the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Alom Extrusion Ltd., we find that the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case has held that the amendment to the second proviso to the Sec 43(B) of the Income Tax Act
CIT v Alembic Glass Industries Limited (High Court of Gujarat) – The law is settled – if a business liability has definitely arisen in the accounting year, the deduction should be allowed although the liability may have to be quantified and discharged at a future date.What should be certain is the incurring of the liability. It should be capable of being estimated with reasonable certainty though the actual quantification may not be possible. If these requirements are satisfied the liability is not a contingent one. The liability is in praesenti though it will be discharged at a future date. It does not make any difference if the future date on which the liability shall have to be discharged is not certain.
The only issue in this appeal of the revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition made by the AO on account of employees’ contribution to ESI & PF by invoking the provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act. For this revenue has raised the following two grounds:
Brooke Bond India Ltd. Vs. JCIT & Anr. (Calcutta High Court) – Tribunal was justified in law in not allowing the sum of Rs.1,43,35,000/- which represents the liability on account of pension on the basis of the resolution of the Board payable to the employee till their death. Whether, the liability on account of pension on the basis of the provisions made should be allowed for the period till the death of the employees or all liabilities should be limited for the period of accounting year relevant to this assessment year.
Since export turnover has been defined by Parliament and there is a specific exclusion of freight and insurance, the expression “export turnover” cannot have a different meaning when it forms a constituent part of the total turnover for the purposes of the application of the formula prescribed by section 10A(4).
Section 43B opens with a non obstante clause which means that it controls the operation of other provisions of the Income-tax Act in that section 43B will have overriding effect notwithstanding other provisions under which a deduction may otherwise be allowable.
Whether the liability has been deferred or not has to be considered not from the simplistic point of the term ‘defer’ but in context of the incentive scheme for deferral, as is evident from the circular issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes. The subject matter of Circular no.496 dated 25th September, 1987 is Sales Tax Deferral Scheme and applicability of provisions of section 43B of the Act.
CIT Vs Aimil Ltd – It was held that if the employees contribution is not deposited by the due date prescribed under the relevant Act and is deposited late, the employer not only pays interest on such delayed payment but could incur penalties also. Those Acts permit the employer to make deposit with some delays. Therefore, these amounts could not be disallowed under section 43B
The assessee paid the employees’ contribution to PF and ESIC after the grace period but before the due date for filing the return. The AO disallowed the payment u/s 36(1) (va) and held that s. 43B had no application. This was confirmed by the CIT (A). On appeal, HELD deciding in favour of the assessee:
