Continuing offence of money-laundering: discharge set aside and proceedings reinstated where laundering continued after inclusion of predicate offence...
International transaction characterisation of domestic divestment of support services business rejected; transaction between resident associated enter...
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.