TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 311
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dated 29.02.2016. The assessee assailing the order of the CIT(A) has raised before us the following grounds of appeal:- "1. Employees Contribution to Provident Fund of Rs. 6,30,867/- a) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition of Rs. 6,30,867/- payment made towards Employee Contribution to Provident Fund after specific due date." 2. Briefly stated, the assessee company which is engaged in the business of manufacturing and repair of electrical transformers had filed its return of income for A.Y. 2013-14 on 27.08.2013, declaring total income at Rs. 2,23,68,227/-. The return of income filed by the assessee was processed as such under Sec. 143(1) of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../- under Sec. 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) after deliberating on the contentions advanced by the assessee before him, was however, not persuaded to accept the same and sustained the aforesaid disallowance. 5. The assessee being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. The Ld. Authorized Representative (for short 'A.R') for the assessee Shri. Virag Shah submitted, that as the assessee had deposited the amount of the employees contribution towards provident fund, before the 'due date' contemplated under Sec. 139(1) for filing of its return of income for the year under consideration viz. A.Y 2013-14, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Feb-13 60,730.00 58,996.00 5,444.00 1,25,170.00 20-Mar-13 16-Mar-13 Non-Delay Mar-13 65,077.00 63,309.00 5,840.00 1,34,226.00 20-Apr-13 21-May-13 Delay Total 7,09,592.00 6,89,863.00 63,642.00 14,63,097.00 It was the contention of the Ld. A.R that the lower authorities had erred in observing that the provisions of Sec. 43B were applicable only in respect of the employers contribution to provident fund, and would not take within its sweep the deduction relating to the employees contribution to the said welfare fund, which as per them would fall within the realm of Sec. 36(1)(va) of the Act. It was submitted by the Ld. A.R that the issue under cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... beyond the stipulated period contemplated under the Provident Fund act, but before the 'due date' of filing of its return of income under Sec. 139(1) of the Act. We find that it is an admitted fact, that though the assessee had deposited the employees contribution to provident fund beyond the time period allowed under the PF act, however, the said amounts were paid before the 'due date' of filing of the return of income by the assessee under Sec. 139(1) of the Act. We are unable to accept the observations of the lower authorities, that the provisions of Sec. 43B would not be applicable as regards the employees contribution to provident fund, and the same would continue to be governed by Sec. 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act. We find th....