https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770822 HC held that, at the time of issuing intimation under s.143(1)(a), the allowability of delayed employees' contribution to ESI and EPF under s.36(1)(va) r/w s.2(24)(x) was a highly debatable issue, subsequently settled by the SC in Checkmate Services. Therefore, such a contentious disallowance could not lawfully be made through the prima facie adjustment mechanism of s.143(1)(a), and ought to have been examined under regular assessment u/s 143(3). The disallowance of employees' contribution and the consequential order u/s 154 were set aside. The appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee. en-us Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Dec 2025 14:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770822 HC held that, at the time of issuing intimation under s.143(1)(a), the allowability of delayed employees' contribution to ESI and EPF under s.36(1)(va) r/w s.2(24)(x) was a highly debatable issue, subsequently settled by the SC in Checkmate Services. Therefore, such a contentious disallowance could not lawfully be made through the prima facie adjustment mechanism of s.143(1)(a), and ought to have been examined under regular assessment u/s 143(3). The disallowance of employees' contribution and the consequential order u/s 154 were set aside. The appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770822