Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- 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.
Issues: Whether the addition made under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of employees' contribution to the Labour Welfare Fund was sustainable when the contribution was deposited within the grace period prescribed under the Punjab Labour Welfare Fund Act, 1965.
Analysis: The disputed amount represented employees' contribution to the Labour Welfare Fund. The relevant state welfare law allowed payment within the prescribed period together with a grace period, and the contribution was deposited on the last permissible date within that framework. Since the payment was made within the statutory time allowed under the governing labour law, the contribution could not be treated as a delayed deposit for the purpose of disallowance under section 36(1)(va).
Conclusion: The addition under section 36(1)(va) was not sustainable and was deleted, in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only on the disallowance relating to employees' contribution to the Labour Welfare Fund, while the remaining grounds were either not pressed, infructuous, or required no adjudication.
Ratio Decidendi: Where employees' contribution is deposited within the time allowed under the applicable labour welfare statute, including any legally provided grace period, no disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 can be made on the ground of delay.