TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 143
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of appeal:- ITA No. 1139/Del/2021 [Assessment Year : 2018-19) 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] is bad both in the eye of law and on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,96,060/- made by the AO(CPC) on account of late deposit of employees' contribution towards provident fund and ESI Fund. 3. On the facts of case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition made by AO, that employees contribution of PF and ESI Fund would disallow when paid after the due date prescribed under relevant Act but before due date of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts by applying amendments to section 36(1 )(va) and "Explanation 5" inserted to Section 43B introduced in the Finance Act 2021 retrospectively. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the addition ignoring the various judicial pronouncements brought on record by the assessee in this regard. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in passing the order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in clear violation of principle of natural justice. 7. On the facts and circumstances ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng Explanation 2 to Section 39(1)((va) and held that the amendment with apply only from Assessment Year 2021-22 and subsequent years as it was inserted with effect from 1/4/2021. 3. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and the decisions relied on. It is not in dispute that the Contributions to Provident Fund and the ESI were remitted by the assessee before due date for filing of return. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd. (Supra) held that if the Provident Fund and ESI Contributions were remitted before due date of filing of return of income such contributions cannot be disallowed u/s 43B of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e case of Indian Geotechnical Services (supra) has held that amendment made by Finance Bill 2021 shall take effect from 1st April 2021 and will accordingly apply to A.Y. 2021-11 and subsequent years. In the present case assessment year involved is 2018-19 and therefore following the aforesaid decision in the case of Indian Geotecfenical Services (supra), I am of the view that the amended provisions would have no application to the case under consideration. Before me, Learned DR has relied on the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal in the case of Vedvan Consultants Pvt. Ltd. (supra). It is settled law that when two judgments are available giving different views then the judgment which is in favour of the assessee shall apply as held in....