Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Supreme Court examined the tax treatment of amounts recovered by an employer from employees as provident or ESI contributions, noting such sums are taxable as income when received. The Court explained that deduction under the employer-deduction provision is available only if the employer credits the employees' contributions to the relevant fund by the 'due date', which the Explanation defines as the date required under the applicable Act, rule, order or notification. The Court identified two conflicting interpretations: one requiring crediting by the statutory fund due date for deduction, and an alternative treating employee and employer contributions alike under the non-obstante clause permitting deduction if deposited by return due date.
Supreme Court examined the tax treatment of amounts recovered by an employer from employees as provident or ESI contributions, noting such sums are taxable as income when received. The Court explained that deduction under the employer-deduction provision is available only if the employer credits the employees' contributions to the relevant fund by the 'due date', which the Explanation defines as the date required under the applicable Act, rule, order or notification. The Court identified two conflicting interpretations: one requiring crediting by the statutory fund due date for deduction, and an alternative treating employee and employer contributions alike under the non-obstante clause permitting deduction if deposited by return due date.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.