TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 123
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h the aid of section 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) on the ground that employees' contribution towards PF & ESI was not deposited by the assessee within the due date provided under these two Acts. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that these payments have been made before the due date of filing of the return and, therefore, the issue is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of (i) CIT. vs. Vijayshree Ltd. in ITAT No. 243 of 2011 & GA No. 26607 of 2011;(ii) CIT. vs. Philips Carbon Black Ltd. in GA No. 1382 of 2014 & ITAT 31 of 2014; (iii) CIT. vs. M/s. Coal India Ltd. in ITA 12 of 2015 and (iv) M/s. Akzo Nobel India Ltd. vs. CIT. in ITA No. 110 of 2011. This aspect has been considered....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. We note that the Finance Bill, 2021 has brought in an amendment which disallows the employees' contribution made in PF and ESI if not made within the due date as prescribed by the respective statutes (PF and ESI Act). So after the amendment has been inserted according to Shri Miraj D. Shah takes effect from 1st April, 2021 i.e. AY 2021-22 and subsequent assessment year and if the remittance of PF/ESI Employees' Contribution is not made within the time prescribed by the PF/ESI Act then the remittance cannot be allowed as a deduction which is prospective in operation. Whereas according to Ld. CIT(A), the amendment brought in is clarificatory in nature so, retrospective in operation. So we have to adjudicate this issue whether the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... one has to apply the test as laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Snowtex Investment Ltd. (supra) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme court took note of the law laid down on this issue by the Constitution Bench in M/s. Vatika Township Ltd. and held that the intent of the Parliament/legislature need to be looked into for ascertaining whether the amendment should be retrospective or not. In Vatika Township Ltd. (supra) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the notes on clauses appended to the Finance Bill will throw light as to the legislative intent; because it has to be borne in mind that Parliament/legislature is aware of three concepts before an amendment is brought in, which can be discerned from reading of the "Notes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... relying on the ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and M/s. Snowtex Investment Ltd. (supra) and also taking note of the binding decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court on this issue before us in Shri Vijayshree Ltd. Ltd. (supra), M/s. Philips Carbon Black Ltd. (supra), M/s. Coal India Ltd. (supra), M/s. Akzo Nobel India Ltd. (supra), we set aside the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to allow the claim of deduction in respect of employees contribution shares towards ESI, PF, by the assessee before the due date of filing of return u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Therefore the appeal of assessee succeeds and so, it is allowed in favor of assessee". 4. A perusal....