TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1496
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i ["learned CIT(A)"], for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - "Being aggrieved by the CIT(A) order u/s. 250 dated 27.08.2024 passed by the learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, this appeal petition is submitted on the following grounds which it is prayed may be considered without prejudice to one another. 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred both in facts and in law in disallowing Rs. 89,68,462/- under the provisions of section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without considering the fact that, the Company has not earned any exempt income nor incurred any expenditure on making investments during the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....income on 28/03/2019 declaring a loss of INR 45,68,83,426. The return filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices under section 143(2) and section 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. During the assessment proceedings, inter-alia, it was observed that the assessee has made substantial investments in shares, the income of which is or will be exempt from taxation as per the provisions of the Act. Accordingly, the assessee was asked to show cause as to why the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D be not made in the present case. The Assessing Officer ("AO") vide order dated 30/03/2021 passed under section 143(3) read with section 143(3A) and section 143(3B) of the Act disagreed with th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d CIT(A) further held that the clarificatory amendment brought in section 14A by the Finance Act, 2022 is applicable to the case of the assessee and any expenditure incurred in the previous year which earns exempt income would be disallowed. 6. From the perusal of the annual report of the assessee for the financial year 2017-18, forming part of the paper book from pages 21-68, we find that during the year the total investment declared is INR 9038.91 lakh. We further find that during the year the assessee received no dividend income from its investments and thus claimed no exemption under section 10(34) of the Act while filing its return of income. The aforesaid fact has also not been disputed by the Revenue. We find that the Hon'ble Delh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Thus, in view of the above, the disallowance computed undersection 14A read with Rule 8D is directed to be deleted. Accordingly, ground no.2 raised in assessee's appeal is allowed. 9. The issue arising in ground no.3, raised in assessee's appeal, pertains to disallowance on account of delayed payment of employees' contribution to Provident Fund (P.F.) and Employees State Insurance Corporation (E.S.I.C) under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. Having considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record, we find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v/s CIT, reported in [2022] 448 ITR 518 (SC) held that the payment towards employees' contribution to P.F. and E.S.I.C., after the due....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is deposited on or before the due date, is correct and justified. The non-obstante clause has to be understood in the context of the entire provision of Section 43B which is to ensure timely payment before the returns are filed, of certain liabilities which are to be borne by the assessee in the form of tax, interest payment and other statutory liability. In the case of these liabilities, what constitutes the due date is defined by the statute. Nevertheless, the assessees are given some leeway in that as long as deposits are made beyond the due date, but before the date of filing the return, the deduction is allowed. That, however, cannot apply in the case of amounts which are held in trust, as it is in the case of employees' contributi....