2021 (10) TMI 787

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for condoning the delay, it is discernable that the impugned order passed by the Ld. PCIT during the midst of Covid Pandemic. Therefore, the delay is condoned. 3. Coming to the merits of the issue, the Ld. AR submitted that the only issue on which the Ld. PCIT has found fault with the A.O. is that the A.O. has not made any disallowance u/s. 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) of the Act when there was the delay on the part of the assessee while depositing the employees contribution to Provident Fund and Employees State Insurance in the relevant funds. According to the Ld. PCIT since there was delay caused by the assessee in depositing employees contribution to PF and ESI within the due date prescribed by respective PF Act and ESI Act, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... due date of the filing of the return of income. When this fact is not disputed and is discernable from the chart prepared by the Ld. PCIT itself in his impugned order, the A.O's view not to disallow the amount u/s. 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) of the Act is in consonance with the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Vijayshree Ltd. [2014] 43 taxman.com 396 (Cal) and similar issue cropped up before this Tribunal in Royal Touch Fablon Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, AY 2019-10, ITA 239/Kol/2021 dated 09.09.2021 wherein this view of the A.O. has been upheld wherein the Tribunal held as under: "2. At the outset, the Ld. AR Shri Sushil Surana submitted that the sole issue permeating in all the three (3) cap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Royal Touch Fablon Pvt. Ltd.; and Rs. 2,32,592/- in the appeal of M/s. Panna Textile Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Rs. 8,49,016/- in the appeal of M/s. Anmol Feeds Pvt. Ltd. by the Ld. CIT(A) (NFAC) on account of assessee's' making delayed payment of employees' contribution towards PF & ESI. It is an admitted fact which has not been disputed by either by the AO or the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution towards PF & ESI before filing of return u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Having taken note of this fact and also the fact that this Tribunal has already taken a view that the amendment brought in by Finance Act, 2021 on this issue has been held to be prospective in nature in the case of Shri Harendra Na....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....endra Nath Biswas vs. DCIT for A.Y. 2019-20 in ITA No. 186/Kol/2021 dated 16.07.2021 wherein it was held that the amendment/explanation brought in by Finance Act, 2021 is prospective in nature and is not applicable to the earlier years. Therefore, we reiterate the same that the amendment/explanation brought in by Finance Act, 2021 with effect from 01.04.2021 on this issue is prospective and taking note that the relevant assessment year is 2015-16, we are of the opinion that the amendment/explanation brought in by Finance Act, 2021 cannot be used to unsettle the settled position of law passed by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vijayshree Ltd. (supra), since there is no retrospective legislative over-ruling. Therefore....