TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (10) TMI 1196
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the appellate order in the manner passed. The appellate order as passed is void-ab-initio and bad in law and is liable to be quashed. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant without following the binding decision of jurisdictional High Court and honourable Apex court. The order passed without following the legal precedence is bad in law and therefore liable to be quashed. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre should have, by following the principles laid down for binding precedence allowed the appeal. On the contrary, the dismissal of appeal despite binding judicial prece....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... f) Holding that, the amendments to Section 36(1)(va) and Section 43B brought in by Finance Act, 2021 are retrospective, clarificatory and declaratory in nature. and in thus confirming the disallowance of Rs. 71,677/- as made to the returned income of the appellant. The disallowance as made being bad in law and on facts should have been deleted. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in levying interest u/s. 234B & 234C of the Act. The appellant denies his liability to pay interest as levied. The interest levied being erroneous are to be deleted. 7. In view of the above and on other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing, it is requested that the order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 376/Bang/2021 (order dated 11.10.2021). 6. The learned Departmental Representative relied on the orders of the Income Tax Authorities. 7. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. Admittedly, the assessee has remitted the employees' contribution to ESI before the due date for filing of return u/s. 139(1) of the I.T. Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Essae Teraoka (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT reported in 366 ITR 408 (Kar.) has categorically held that the assessee would be entitled to deduction of employees' contribution to ESI provided the payment was made prior to the due date of filing of return of income u/s. 139(1) of the I.T. Act. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court differe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the revenue that if the employer fails to deduct the employees' contribution on or before the due date, contemplated under the provisions of the PF Act and the PF Scheme, that would have to be treated as income within the meaning of Section 2(24)(x) of the IT Act and in which case, the assessee is liable to pay tax on the said amount treating that as his income, deserves to be rejected. 22. With respect, we find it difficult to endorse the view taken by the Gujarat High Court. WE agree with the view taken by this Court in W.A. No. 4077/2013. 23. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the substantial question of law framed by us is answered in favour of the appellant-assessee and against the respondent-revenue. Ther....