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>Employee's Provident Fund Deduction Denied for Late Payment: Tribunal Upholds Decision</h1> <h3>Goldstrike Fuel & Services LLP Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-6 (1) Hyderabad</h3> Goldstrike Fuel & Services LLP Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-6 (1) Hyderabad - TMI Issues:Denial of deduction for employee's contribution towards Provident Fund for AYs 2017-18 and 2018-19 due to late payment.Analysis:The appeals were filed against the orders of the ld. CIT (A)-6, Hyderabad concerning the denial of deduction for employee's contribution towards Provident Fund for AYs 2017-18 and 2018-19. The issue revolved around the contention that the contributions were not paid within the due date specified in the Provident Fund Act. The Ld. CIT (A) upheld the orders of the Ld. AO based on precedents from higher judiciary.The Tribunal examined the provisions of Section 36(1)(va) and Section 43B of the Income Tax Act. Section 36(1)(va) allows deduction if the employee's contribution to Provident Fund/ESI is remitted within the due date mentioned in the relevant Act. On the other hand, Section 43B pertains to the employer's contribution and allows deduction if paid before the due date of filing the return of income.It was clarified that Section 43B does not apply to employee's contribution, as it is distinct from the employer's contribution. The Tribunal emphasized that employee's contribution is a part of the employee's salary, remitted by the employer on the employee's behalf. The Tribunal cited judgments from the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court and the Hon'ble Kerala High Court to support this interpretation.The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court emphasized that under Section 36(1)(va), the due date for remittance of employee's contribution is crucial for claiming the deduction. Similarly, the Hon'ble Kerala High Court highlighted the distinction between employee's and employer's contributions, affirming that the deduction under Section 43B applies only to the employer's contribution.In line with the legal precedents and the provisions of the Income Tax Act, the Tribunal found no error in the decisions of the Revenue Authorities. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed, confirming the orders of the Revenue Authorities for AYs 2017-18 and 2018-19. The Tribunal's decision aligned with the interpretations provided by the higher judiciary and the specific provisions of the Act.Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the denial of deduction for employee's contribution towards Provident Fund due to late payment, in accordance with the legal framework and established judicial interpretations.
TaxTMI 