https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789029 A prima facie adjustment under section 143(1)(a)(iv) could not be used to disallow employees' provident fund contribution under section 36(1)(va) where, on the date the return was processed, the jurisdictional High Court had already taken a view favourable to the assessee and the issue remained debatable. The later Supreme Court decision in Checkmate Services did not govern the position at that earlier point of processing. The commentary therefore notes that such a disallowance was not sustainable through summary processing, and that interest-related additions were only consequential to the substantive dispute. en-us Tue, 10 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Apr 2026 08:50:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789029 A prima facie adjustment under section 143(1)(a)(iv) could not be used to disallow employees' provident fund contribution under section 36(1)(va) where, on the date the return was processed, the jurisdictional High Court had already taken a view favourable to the assessee and the issue remained debatable. The later Supreme Court decision in Checkmate Services did not govern the position at that earlier point of processing. The commentary therefore notes that such a disallowance was not sustainable through summary processing, and that interest-related additions were only consequential to the substantive dispute. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 10 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789029