TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (4) TMI 535
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ting the addition made towards belated remittance of employees' contribution of PF and ESI, which was disallowed under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 on 26.09.2014 admitting total income of Rs.. NIL. The case was selected for scrutiny. After considering the details furnished against statutory notices, while completing the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer disallowed the belated remittance of employees' contribution of PF and ESI to the tune of Rs..1,50,07,637/- under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. On appeal, by considering the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e the entire amounts have been remitted before the due date of filing of return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, the same should be allowed as deduction under section 43B of the Act. By following the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Industrial Security & Intelligence India Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to allow the actual amount paid before the due date of filing the returns under section 139(1) of the Act. We have perused the decision in the case of CIT v. Industrial Security & Intelligence India Pvt. Ltd. (supra), wherein, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has observed and held as under: "2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The respondent/assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d on before us. It is not in dispute that all these payments of provident fund Rs. 16,20,571/- and ESI Rs. 17,51,490/- were made beyond the grace period/due date allowed under Provident Fund & ESI Acts but before due date for filing of income-tax return. This issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by various High Courts following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd. (319 ITR 306), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that omission of second proviso to section 43B and amendment of first proviso by Finance Act, 2003 are curative in nature and are effective retrospectively and thus with effect from 1.4.1988 i.e. the date of insertion of first proviso. The coordinate Bench o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of JCIT Vs. M/s. S.M. Apparels (P) Ltd. (supra). The Tribunal has been consistently following the view taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court. Accordingly, we hold that the assessee is entitled to claim expenditure on employee's contribution towards ESI and Provident Fund for both the AYs. Accordingly, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed." 6. Respectfully following the above, decision, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete disallowances made under section 43B of the Act for both these assessment years. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed." 3. Aggrieved by the said order of the Tribunal, the Revenue is before this Court. 4. Heard learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue and perused t....