TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT Upholds CIT(A) Order on Timely Remittance of Employee Contributions</h1> <h3>The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5 (1) Visakhapatnam Versus N Nageswara Rao & Co. And (Vice-Versa)</h3> The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5 (1) Visakhapatnam Versus N Nageswara Rao & Co. And (Vice-Versa) - TMI Issues:Appeal by revenue against CIT(A) order, Addition made for delay in remitting PF and ESI contributions, CIT(A) deletion of addition, Tribunal's consistent view on employees' contributions to PF and ESI, Cross objections by assessee.Analysis:The appeal before the ITAT Visakhapatnam involved the revenue challenging the CIT(A) order regarding the addition made for the delay in remitting employees' contributions to Provident Fund (PF) and Employee State Insurance (ESI). The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 86,075 as income under section 36(1)(v) read with section 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 due to the delayed remittance of PF and ESI by the assessee. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, citing precedents from the Tribunal's orders in similar cases. The CIT(A) referred to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Eastern Power Distribution Company of AP Ltd. and held in favor of the assessee, following the principle that if the total contribution is deposited before the due date of filing the return, no disallowance can be made. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A) order, emphasizing the importance of timely remittance of contributions.The Tribunal consistently followed the decisions of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court and ITAT, Hyderabad in similar cases, supporting the view that employees' contributions to PF and ESI should be allowed as deductions if paid before the due date of filing the return. The Tribunal's ruling in this case aligned with its previous decisions and upheld the CIT(A)'s order, dismissing the revenue's appeal. The Tribunal's stance was further reinforced by its previous ruling in a similar case dated 25th January 2019. As a result, the appeal by the revenue and the cross objections by the assessee were both dismissed. The consistent approach of the Tribunal in interpreting the provisions related to employees' contributions to PF and ESI was a significant factor in the decision-making process, ensuring uniformity in treatment across cases.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
