2021 (2) TMI 277

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n of income was processed U/s. 143(1) of the Act by the Assessing Officer at CPC, Bengaluru determining the total income of the assessee at Rs. 40,14,930/- by making adjustment of Rs. 26,22,570/- U/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. 3. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) stating that the employee's contribution to Provident Fund and ESI of Rs. 26,22,570/- was remitted before the due date of filing of the return of income U/s. 139(1) of the Act and therefore, the same should not have been disallowed U/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) however, observed that though there are some decisions in favour of the assessee, there were decisions in favour of the Revenue as well. He further observed that the decision of the Hon&#3....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....financial year or before the due date of filing the return of income. Hence, the same should be allowed as a deduction. 5. Your appellant submits that CIT(A) as well as the CPC erred in not treating the expenditure as allowable U/s. 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as the payment of Employees and employer's contribution to PF and ESI was incurred in the course of business and for the purposes of business. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the fact that in case of conflicting judgments by the High Courts, the view favourable to the appellant has to be considered. 7. For these and such other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing your appellant prays that the Hon'ble Members may delete t....