<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2017 (1) TMI 677 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337597</link>
    <description>Employees&#039; contributions to provident fund and ESI, though not deposited within the welfare-statute due date, remain deductible when actually paid before the due date for filing the return under section 139(1). Amounts recovered from employees are treated as income under section 2(24)(x), and section 36(1)(va) ordinarily requires credit to the relevant fund within the prescribed time. However, section 43B(b), as a non obstante provision, permits deduction on actual payment before the return-filing deadline, and the curative amendment removing the second proviso to section 43B was treated as retrospective. The deduction was therefore upheld for the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2017 20:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=455100" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 677 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337597</link>
      <description>Employees&#039; contributions to provident fund and ESI, though not deposited within the welfare-statute due date, remain deductible when actually paid before the due date for filing the return under section 139(1). Amounts recovered from employees are treated as income under section 2(24)(x), and section 36(1)(va) ordinarily requires credit to the relevant fund within the prescribed time. However, section 43B(b), as a non obstante provision, permits deduction on actual payment before the return-filing deadline, and the curative amendment removing the second proviso to section 43B was treated as retrospective. The deduction was therefore upheld for the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337597</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>