1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Appellate Tribunal directs fresh consideration on payment discrepancies, sets aside disallowed PF and ESIC payments.</h1> The Appellate Tribunal found discrepancies in the payment dates provided by the assessee and sent the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh ... - Issues involved: Disallowance of PF and ESIC payments u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2006-07.PF Disallowance: The Assessing Officer disallowed PF payments made after the due date at the Bangalore facility. The ld. CIT(A) allowed the PF payment made within the grace period but confirmed the disallowance of ESIC payment made after the due date. The assessee challenged the sustenance of disallowance of both PF and ESIC payments.Adjournment Request: The assessee sought an adjournment due to the counsel being out of station but later requested the issue to be set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification.Decision: After considering the submissions, the Appellate Tribunal found discrepancies in the actual dates of payment provided by the assessee. As no supporting material was presented to prove payments were made within the grace period, the matter was sent back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The orders passed by revenue authorities were set aside, and the Assessing Officer was directed to decide the matter afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to be heard. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes.Result: The assessee's appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the order was pronounced in the open court on 23.12.2010.