Retrospective amendment to section 43-B did not save deduction where provident fund and ESI dues were paid late.

Deduction for provident fund and employees' state insurance contributions under section 43-B was denied because the amounts were not paid within the due date prescribed by the relevant scheme, even though payment was made before filing the return. The court accepted that deletion of the proviso to section 43-B was curative and retrospective in principle, but held that retrospective amendment did not dispense with the statutory conditions for actual payment within the prescribed due date. The deduction was therefore not allowable, and the claim failed against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether deduction for provident fund and employees' state insurance contributions was allowable under section 43-B when the amounts were not paid within the due date prescribed by the relevant scheme but were paid before filing the return, and whether the deletion of the proviso operated retrospectively to assist the assessee.

Analysis: The claim rested on the contention that the deletion of the proviso to section 43-B had curative and retrospective effect. The Court accepted the retrospective character of the amendment in principle, but held that the assessee still had to satisfy the conditions embedded in the proviso and the scheme governing payment. Since the payment was not made by the due date prescribed under the provident fund scheme, and the assessee did not meet the statutory conditions for the deduction, the retrospective deletion did not advance the claim.

Conclusion: The deduction was not allowable and the issue was decided against the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: A curative and retrospective amendment to section 43-B does not permit deduction unless the statutory conditions for actual payment within the prescribed due date are satisfied.

---