Income Tax : This guide explains how Section 43B(h) defers tax deductions where payments to Micro and Small Enterprises remain unpaid beyond th...
Income Tax : The Central Government, in the Union Budget 2026, has proposed an important amendment concerning employee welfare funds. The objec...
Income Tax : 2023 Income Tax change (Sec 43B(h)) mandates that deductions for payments to Micro and Small Enterprises are allowed only when pai...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court upholds disallowance of delayed PF/ESI contributions under Section 143(1), but permits deductions when the due da...
Income Tax : Practical guide to tax audit under Section 44AB for trader assessees, covering groundwork, data analysis, compliance checks, and f...
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 : The Tribunal ruled that although CSR expenditure is not allowable under Section 37, eligible donations made to recognised institut...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi held that the Transfer Pricing Officer could not arbitrarily determine the arm's length price of management service...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi held that the Revenue could not substitute the assessee's consistent method of revenue recognition with the Percent...
Income Tax : The ITAT Mumbai held that Explanation 1 to Section 37(1) could not apply in the absence of any finding by the competent authority ...
Income Tax : The dispute concerned deduction of CSR expenditure incurred before Explanation 2 to section 37(1) became applicable. The ITAT held...
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...
Facts are not in dispute inasmuch as it is also not in dispute that the assessee has paid the amount of service tax of Rs. 41,97,663/- before the due date of filing of return, therefore, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the said disallowance. As regards other disallowance of service tax payable Rs. 48,10,998/- we find merit in the plea of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Tribunal in Pharma Search (supra) wherein the Tribunal after considering the decision of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1977] 110 ITR 385 (Cal.), Real Image Media Technologies (P.) Ltd. (supra) and other decisions held as under:-
After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant material on record it is observed that the due date for filing the return of income by the assessee under section 139(1) for the relevant year is 30.11.2006. The AO has drawn a chart at page-4 of the assessment order showing the dates of actual deposits and due dates for the said contributions of EPF and ESIC.
In the instant case, the interest is payable in respect of amounts deposited by financial institutions with the assessee by subscribing to the bonds issued by the assessee. The interest is payable in respect of certain deposits received by the assessee and not in respect of any loans, advances or borrowings made by the assessee. For the same reason, clause (e) of section 43B relating to loans and advances from a scheduled bank is also not applicable in the instant case.
Section 43B of the Act is applicable only in respect of any amount paid as interest to a scheduled bank. A scheduled bank as defined in Explanation 4 to Section 43B of the Act would have the same meaning as contained in the Explanation to Section 11(5) (iii) of the Act.
For the purpose of claiming benefit of deduction of the sum paid against the liability of tax, duty, cess, fee, etc., the year of payment is relevant and is only to be taken into account. The year in which the assessee incurred the liability to pay such tax, duty, etc., has no relevance and cannot be linked with the matter of giving benefit of deduction under Section 43B of the Act.
Amounts whether employees’ contribution or the employer’s contribution are not being shown as payable as on the last date of the Assessment Year cannot be brought to tax if the same has been paid before the due date of filing of the return.
Arrears of salary and other benefits payable to employees, is not covered by Section 43-B at all. Such liabilities are not contributions to provident fund, superannuation or any other fund or plan which the employer is obliged to extend to its employees to fulfill its statutory or contractual obligations. The character of the amounts in this case is pure and simple arrears of wages, which were directed to be paid as a result of wage revision exercise mandated by an award.
We are dealing with cases where though the amount was not deposited by the due date under the Welfare Acts, it was definitely deposited before furnishing the returns. We see no reason to make any distinction between the employees’ contribution or the employers’ contribution.
The issue before us is whether the interest paid on sales tax under the amnesty scheme is an allowable deduction as business expenditure. The law is well settled that the interest paid on sales tax is not of penal in nature and is therefore allowable as business expenditure. Therefore, in our opinion the interest on sales tax is an allowable business expenditure.
Deemed payment could not be treated as actual payment to qualify for deduction under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, we do not agree with the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the assessee herein that depositing the amount in a bank, even if it be in a separate account, would satisfy the provisions of Section 43 B as actual payment. Reading the decision in Sri Venkatesa Mills Ltd. (supra) along with the decision in McDowell & Co. Ltd. (supra), one can only observe that the law declared in both the above judgments are one and the same, in the sense, that both the decisions held that under Section 43 B only actual payment and not any notional or deemed payment that would be relevant for considering the deduction.
