TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 1621
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Weblinks Limited Versus The DCIT/The ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru. And Vivek Singhal Versus CPC, Bengaluru And M/s. Kohinoor Elastics Pvt. Ltd Versus DCIT - 2(1), Indore. MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : Supriya Sharma, AR For the Respondent : Ram Maurya, D.R. ORDER PER BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, A.M.: THESE APPEALS: 1. These eleven appeals filed by different parties [referred to as "assessee"] are directed against the orders passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeal) ["Ld. CIT(A)"] as per the following details: S.No. ITA No. / Party Assessment Year Date of CIT(A)'s order 1. 151/Ind/2021 GSD Constructions Indore Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Applications, by which suo motu extension of the limitation-period for filing of appeals w.e.f. 15.03.2020 under all laws has been granted and hence there is no delay in fact. We confronted the Ld. DR who agreed to the submission of Ld. AR. In view of this, the appeal are proceeded with for hearing, there being no delay. BACKGROUND: 3. In all these cases, the return filed by the assessee was processed by the learned CPC, Bangalore ["Ld. AO"] u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ["the Act"] after making a disallowance of delayed payment of employees' contributions to Provident Fund / Employees State Insurance ("PF / ESI"). Being aggrieved by the disallowance so made by Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal to Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... AR further submitted that even otherwise the impugned disallowance is debatable in nature and outside the scope of section 143(1)(iv) of the Act invoked by the Ld. AO and therefore also not sustainable, as held by ITAT, Visakhapatnam Bench in M/s. S.V. Engineering Constructions India (P) Limited vs. DCIT (ITA No.130/Viz/2021) order dated 23.09.2021. 8. With these submissions, the Ld. AR prayed that the disallowance made by Ld. AO is illegal and deserves to be deleted. SUBMISSION OF Ld. DR: 9. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied upon the orders of lower authorities. He further submitted that in following decisions it has been held that once the employees' contributions are paid after the due dates under PF / ESI laws, disallowance is at....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isallowance would happen. The Ld. DR further submitted that the words " shall be deemed never to have been applied " appearing in these newly inserted Explanations clearly demonstrate that the amendments, though inserted from 01.04.2021, are clarificatory in nature and hence they would apply retrospectively in view of the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Zile Singh Vs. State of Haryana (2004) 5 SCC 1. Therefore, according the Ld. DR the amendments are applicable to the assessment-year involved in the present appeal too and hence the disallowance made by Ld. AO is very much in accordance with the law. 11. With these submissions, the Ld. DR argued that the Ld. AO has rightly disallowed the employees contributions to PF / ESI not paid by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the employees contributions paid after due date under PF / ESI law but within the time allowed u/s 43B, are allowable as deduction. 14. Regarding the amendments made through Finance Act, 2021, it is specifically mentioned by the legislature that the amendments are effective from 01.04.2021. Further the Memorandum explaining the Provisions in the Finance Bill, 2021 clearly prescribes thus: "These amendments will take effect from 1st April, 2021 and will accordingly apply to the assessment year 2021-22 and subsequent assessment years." Thus, the legislature itself has categorically stated that the amendments shall apply to the assessment year 2021-22 and subsequent assessment years. Therefore these amendments are not appli....