<?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>2023 (4) TMI 364 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436338</link>
    <description>The ITAT upheld the disallowance of Rs. 2,54,004/- as employee contribution towards Provident Fund and Employee State Insurance due to late deposit. The decision was based on the Supreme Court ruling in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. CIT, emphasizing the need for timely deposit of employee contributions as per the respective Acts, distinct from employer contributions. The ITAT held that any delay in depositing employee contributions would result in the disallowance of deductions, dismissing the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Apr 2023 09:11:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=710320" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (4) TMI 364 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436338</link>
      <description>The ITAT upheld the disallowance of Rs. 2,54,004/- as employee contribution towards Provident Fund and Employee State Insurance due to late deposit. The decision was based on the Supreme Court ruling in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. CIT, emphasizing the need for timely deposit of employee contributions as per the respective Acts, distinct from employer contributions. The ITAT held that any delay in depositing employee contributions would result in the disallowance of deductions, dismissing the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436338</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>