Abhijit Hiralal Doshi, Satara V. CPC, Bengaluru

ITA 493/PUN/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4259 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 2; 43B; 139; 139(1)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण “A” यायपीठ प ु णे म । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.493 & 494/PUN/2021 नधा रण वष / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 Abhijit Hiralal Doshi, 123/2, National Highway, A/P. Mhasave, Dist. Satara 415 001 PAN : ABNPD6384J Vs. DCIT, Satara Circle, Satara (Appellant) Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. J.R. Chandekar Revenue by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde स ु नवाई क तार ख / Date of Hearing : 22.09.2022 घोषणा क तार ख / Date of Pronouncement: 22.09.2022 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP: These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi on 29-07-2021 and 04-08-2021 in relation to the assessment years 2018-19 & 2019-20. 2. Both the appeals filed by the assessee are time barred by 8 and 14 days respectively. The assessee has filed affidavits explaining the reasons. We are satisfied with the reasons so stated. Therefore, the delay in filing the instant appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted for disposal on merits. 2 ITA No.493 & 494 /PUN/2021 Abhijit Hiralal Doshi 3. The only issue raised in these two appeals is against the confirmation of disallowance of Rs.3,25,342/- for the A.Y. 2018-19 and Rs.8,23,399/- for the A.Y. 2019-20 made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act on account of late deposit of the Employees’ share of EPF and ESI etc. 4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the AO made disallowance of Rs.3,25,342/- for the A.Y. 2018-19 and Rs.8,23,399/- for the A.Y. 2019-20 in the assessments completed u/s.143(1) of the Act on the ground that the assessee late deposited the employees’ share of EPF and ESI etc. The ld. CIT(A) affirmed the disallowances for both the years. 5. We have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record. It is an admitted position that the assessee did deduct employees’ share of EPF and ESI and paid the same after the due date under the respective legislations but before the time stipulated for filing return u/s 139(1) of the Act for the years under consideration. This fact has been acknowledged in the assessment orders. The issue of disallowance in such circumstances is no more res integra in view of several judgments allowing deduction u/s 36(1)(va) of employees’ share of contribution deposited after due date under the respective Acts but before the date prescribed u/s 139 3 ITA No.493 & 494 /PUN/2021 Abhijit Hiralal Doshi of the Act. The Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in CIT vs. Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP) has held that there exists no difference between employees or employer’s contribution and both are to be allowed as deduction if deposited before the due date. 6. At this juncture, it is relevant to mention that the Finance Act, 2021 has inserted Explanation 2 below section 36(1)(va) providing that the provisions of section 43B shall not apply for the purpose of determining the due date under this clause w.e.f. 01.04.2021. The effect of this amendment is that if the amount of employees’ contribution towards EPF, ESI, etc is delayed by an employer beyond the due date under the respective Acts, the disallowance will be called for notwithstanding the fact that it was deposited before the due date u/s 139 of the Act. The Memorandum explaining the provisions of the Finance Bill, 2021, provides that this amendment will take effect from 1 st April, 2021 and will, accordingly apply in relation to assessment year 2021-2022 and subsequent assessment years. Since the assessment years under consideration is 2018-19 & 2019-20, which are anterior to the amendment carried out with effect from A.Y. 2021-22, we hold that the position of law as settled by various Hon’ble High Courts including the one in CIT vs. Nipso 4 ITA No.493 & 494 /PUN/2021 Abhijit Hiralal Doshi Polyfabriks Ltd. (supra) squarely applies to the facts and circumstances of the instant case, thereby not warranting any disallowance since the amount in question was admittedly deposited before due date u/s 139(1) of the Act. The addition is therefore, directed to be deleted for both the years. 7. In the result, the appeals are allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 22 nd day of September, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY R.S.SYAL JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT प ु णे / Pune; "दनांक / Dated : 22 nd September, 2022 Satish आदेश क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ% / The Appellant. 2. &'यथ% / The Respondent. 3. The concerned CIT(Appeals) concerned 4. The Pr.CIT concerned 5. (वभागीय & त न ध, आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, “A” ब च, प ु णे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 6. गाड फ़ाइल / Guard File. // True Copy // आदेशान ु सार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, प ु णे / ITAT, Pune. 5 ITA No.493 & 494 /PUN/2021 Abhijit Hiralal Doshi Date 1. Draft dictated on 22-09-2022 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 22-09-2022 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *