https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456484 An adjustment under section 143(1) for employees' provident fund contribution cannot rest solely on a tax audit report where the report conflicts with binding jurisdictional High Court law. The processing mechanism still requires notice, consideration of the assessee's response, and a reasoned disposal of objections; a standard template rejection is insufficient. A reported delay in payment, by itself, does not justify disallowance as an adjustment under section 143(1)(a)(iv) in these circumstances. The commentary notes that the amendment relating to section 36(1)(va) was not required to be examined for this dispute, and the adjustment was ultimately deleted. en-us Thu, 25 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Jul 2024 20:13:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456484 An adjustment under section 143(1) for employees' provident fund contribution cannot rest solely on a tax audit report where the report conflicts with binding jurisdictional High Court law. The processing mechanism still requires notice, consideration of the assessee's response, and a reasoned disposal of objections; a standard template rejection is insufficient. A reported delay in payment, by itself, does not justify disallowance as an adjustment under section 143(1)(a)(iv) in these circumstances. The commentary notes that the amendment relating to section 36(1)(va) was not required to be examined for this dispute, and the adjustment was ultimately deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 25 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456484