https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751825 A 690-day delay in filing the appeal was not condoned because the assessee's explanation, based on an unnoticed e-mail, was found unsatisfactory and inconsistent with normal litigant vigilance; the Tribunal's refusal to condone was upheld. On the merits, employees' contribution to provident fund and ESI deposited after the due date under the welfare laws remained disallowable, as such sums are treated as deemed income unless remitted within the prescribed time. The Court applied the settled rule in Checkmate Services and held that the general deduction provision's non-obstante language does not override the specific timeliness requirement for employees' contributions. The appeal failed on limitation and on merits. en-us Fri, 12 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Apr 2026 09:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751825 A 690-day delay in filing the appeal was not condoned because the assessee's explanation, based on an unnoticed e-mail, was found unsatisfactory and inconsistent with normal litigant vigilance; the Tribunal's refusal to condone was upheld. On the merits, employees' contribution to provident fund and ESI deposited after the due date under the welfare laws remained disallowable, as such sums are treated as deemed income unless remitted within the prescribed time. The Court applied the settled rule in Checkmate Services and held that the general deduction provision's non-obstante language does not override the specific timeliness requirement for employees' contributions. The appeal failed on limitation and on merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 12 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751825