TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 1803
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to the addition of Rs. 55,24,096 made by the assessing officer towards belated remittance of employees' contribution of PF & ESI /s 36(1)(va) r.w.s.2(24)(x) of the I.T.Act. 3. During the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer found that the assessee has remitted employees contribution to PF belatedly. However, remittances were made before filing the return of income. The assessing officer was of the view that the employees contribution to PF is deductible only if the same is paid within the due date as prescribed under Provident Fund Act, in accordance with the provisions of Section 36(1), sub clause (va) of I.T.Act. Since the assessee M/s Eastern Power Distribution Co.of AP Ltd., Visakhapatnam remitted the same beyond the time l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rn cannot be ignored. In the case of CIT Vs. Kichha Sugar Co. Ltd.35 Taxmann 54, the Hon'ble High Court of Uttarakhand held that the due date referred in Sec.36 (v)(a) should be read in conjunction with Sec.43B(b) of the I.T. Act, and that deduction should be allowed for payment made before the due date for filing of the return of income. In the case of Cit Vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. 35 Taxmann 616, the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan after referring to the Apex Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (319 ITR 306) & CIT Vs. Vinay Cement Ltd. M/s Eastern Power Distribution Co.of AP Ltd., Visakhapatnam held that the deduction should be allowed for the payment of employee's contribution made b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....11-12 and the ITAT allowed the appeal of the assessee following the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT[366 ITR 408] and the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Hyderabad in the case of Tetra Soft (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT(2015) [40 ITR (Trib) 470]. For ready reference, we reproduce hereunder the relevant paragraph no.10 of the order of this Tribunal cited supra. "10. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and also following the judicial precedents as discussed above, we are of the view that there is no distinction between employees' and employer contribution to PF, and if the total contribution is deposited on or before the due date of furnishing return of income u/s 139(1)....