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>Tribunal allows appeal despite delay for medical reasons, dismisses claim under Income Tax Act. Upholds EPF disallowance.</h1> <h3>Shri K.K. Purushothaman Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward-III, Thiruvalla.</h3> Shri K.K. Purushothaman Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward-III, Thiruvalla. - TMI Issues:Delay in filing appeal before Tribunal, Claim for deduction under Section 36(VA) of the Income Tax Act, Disallowance of EPF contribution under Section 36(1)(va) of the Act, Interpretation of previous court judgments, Admissibility of appeal for adjudication.Delay in filing appeal before Tribunal:The appeal was filed with a delay of 79 days, citing medical reasons for the delay. The Tribunal, after considering the reasons provided by the assessee, condoned the delay and admitted the appeal for adjudication.Claim for deduction under Section 36(VA) of the Income Tax Act:The assessee contended that they were eligible for deduction under Section 36(VA) of the Income Tax Act, claiming that certain aspects were not properly appreciated by the lower authorities. The Tribunal, however, dismissed this claim based on the interpretation of relevant legal provisions and previous court judgments.Disallowance of EPF contribution under Section 36(1)(va) of the Act:The Assessing Officer disallowed the EPF contribution received from employees under Section 36(1)(va) of the Act, as the amount was not remitted within the due date. The CIT(A) upheld this disallowance, stating that the deduction under Section 36(1)(va) is available only if the payment is deposited before the due date specified in the section. The Tribunal affirmed this decision, relying on a judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court.Interpretation of previous court judgments:The assessee relied on previous court judgments to support their claim, including a decision of the Supreme Court. However, the CIT(A) and the Tribunal found that the issue was already decided against the assessee by the Jurisdictional High Court, and therefore, the claim for relief based on previous court judgments was dismissed.Admissibility of appeal for adjudication:The Tribunal, after considering all submissions and relevant legal provisions, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee, based on the interpretation of the law and previous court judgments. The order was pronounced in open court on 19th June 2019.
TaxTMI 