TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 1075
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....DIT, CPC, Bengaluru u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter 'the Act') for the assessment year 2019-20 vide order dated 07.07.2020. 2. The first issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the disallowance made by the AO of delayed remittance of Provident Fund payment u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act, amounting to Rs. 3,47,012/- i.e., employees contribution. 3. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. The admitted facts are that the AO u/s.143(1) of the Act, disallowed the employees contribution to PF amounting to Rs. 3,47,012/- u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act, for not depositing the same within the prescribed due dates as mentioned in the respective acts. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t keeping in view the law of today and in force and not tomorrow's backward adjustment of it. According to Hon'ble Apex court every human being is entitled to arrange his affairs by relying on the existing law and should not find that his plans have been retrospectively upset. This principle of law is known as lex prospicit non respicit, which means law looks forward not backward. In the case of Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd., supra, the issue before Hon'ble Supreme Court was the insertion of proviso to section 113 of the act by the Finance Act 2002 for charging of surcharge was under challenge. Hon'ble Supreme Court noted though provision for surcharge under the Finance Acts have been in existence since 1995, the charge of surcharge with respec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re is fully aware of 3 concepts: (i) prospective amendment with effect from a fixed date; (ii) retrospective amendment with effect from a fixed anterior date; and (iii) clarificatory amendments which are retrospective in nature. Thus, it was a conscious decision of the legislature, even when the legislature knew the implication thereof and took note of the reasons which led to the insertion of the proviso, that the amendment is to operate prospectively. Learned counsel appearing for the assessees sagaciously contrasted the aforesaid stipulation while effecting amendment in Section 113 of the Act, with various other provisions not only in the same Finance Act but Finance Acts pertaining to other years wher....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3, again makes the position clear that surcharge in respect of block assessment of undisclosed income was made prospective. Such a stipulation is contained in second proviso to sub-section (3) of Section 2 of Finance Act, 2003. This proviso reads as under: "Provided further that the amount of income-tax computed in accordance with the provisions of section 113 shall be increased by a surcharge for purposes of the Union as provided in Paragraph A, B, C, D or E, as the case may be, of Part III of the First Schedule of the Finance Act of the year in which the search is initiated under section 132 or requisition is made under section 132A of the income-tax Act." Addition of this proviso in the Finance Act, 2003 further makes i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... [2015] 378 ITR 443 (Kerala). The CIT(A) himself noted the ambiguity in para 7.4 of his order, which reads as under: 7.4 While rendering above decisions the Hon'ble High Courts had the occasion to examine and distinguish a catena of judgements which are usually relied upon by appellants to advance the proposition that the provisions of section 43B encompass within its scope the employees' Contribution as well and therefore any such contribution though not remitted by the employer within due date specified by the PF/ESI Acts, will still be permissible deduction if the same is actually paid in pursuance of Sec. 43B. The CIT(A) further noted the decisions in favour of assessee in para 7.7, and the same are as under: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... out by Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021 i.e. for and from assessment year 2021-22 of Explanation-2 to s. 36(1)(va) of the Act and not retrospectively. 6.9 Thus, from the above, it is clear that the amendment brought in the statute i.e., by Finance Act, 2021, the provisions of Section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the Act amended by inserting Explanation 2 is prospective and not retrospective. Hence, the amended provisions of Section 43B r.w.s. 36(1)(va) of the Act are not applicable for the assessment year 2018-19 but will apply from assessment year 2021- 22 and subsequent assessment years. Hence, this issue of assessee's appeal is allowed. 3.1 As the issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee, we delete the disallowance and ....