https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298215 Employees' contribution to provident fund paid before the due date for furnishing the return was held allowable as a deduction, and the assessment could not be revised on the ground that it was erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue. The Tribunal applied the view that, for provident fund compliance and section 43B purposes, no material distinction survives between employees' and employer's contributions once payment is made before the section 139(1) due date. Following Karnataka High Court and coordinate bench authority, it concluded that invocation of section 263 was unsustainable on this issue. en-us Wed, 26 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Oct 2021 08:15:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298215 Employees' contribution to provident fund paid before the due date for furnishing the return was held allowable as a deduction, and the assessment could not be revised on the ground that it was erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue. The Tribunal applied the view that, for provident fund compliance and section 43B purposes, no material distinction survives between employees' and employer's contributions once payment is made before the section 139(1) due date. Following Karnataka High Court and coordinate bench authority, it concluded that invocation of section 263 was unsustainable on this issue. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 26 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298215