IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F” DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.5639 /DEL/2017 Assessment Year 2014-15 Kiwi Enterprises P. Ltd., C/o Ajay Sabharwal & Associates Chartered Accountants 903, Chiranjiv Tower, 43 Nehru Place, New Delhi. v. ACIT, Circle-14(2), New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AACCK5336L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Shri Parikshit Singh, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing: 12 04 2022 Date of pronouncement: 21 04 2022 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: The c apt io ne d ap p eal ha s be en f i le d at th e i ns ta nc e o f the ass es se e a ga in st t he or der of t he Co mmi s si on er of Inc o me Ta x (Ap pe al s) -X XX VI , Ne w D el hi [ ‘ CI T( A )’ i n sh or t], d ate d 28. 06 .2 01 7 ari si ng f ro m t he a sse ss me nt or der da ted 08 .1 2. 20 16 p as sed b y th e As ses si ng Of f ice r u nde r Sec ti on 14 3( 3) of th e I nco me T ax Act , 1 96 1 (th e Ac t) co nc er ni n g A Y 2 01 3-1 4. 2. As pe r i ts gr ou n ds of ap pe al , t h e a ss ess ee h ere in ha s cha ll en ge d t he di sa llo wa nc e of Rs .4 5, 60, 06 1/ - on acco un t of d el a ye d pa yme nt of e mpl o yee’ s co ntr ib ut io n to war ds E P F a nd E SI C. 3. W h en the matt er was ca ll ed f o r h e ari ng , n on e a ppea r ed on I.T.A. No.5639/DEL/2017 2 beh alf of th e as se ss ee. 4. Ld. D R f or th e Re ven ue r el ied u po n t he as se ss me nt o rde r a nd the f ir st ap pe ll ate o rde r. 5. On p er us al of th e rec ord s, we o bs e rve tha t t he Ass e ssi ng Of f icer ha s mad e the i mpu gn ed ad di tio n o n t he gr ou nd t hat th e ass es se e ha s de po s ite d e mpl o ye e ’s c o ntr ib ut io n to ward s Pro vi den t Fu nd a nd E SI a mo un tin g to R s. 4 5,6 0, 06 1/ - af ter d ue da te a s pre sc ri be d u nd er th e re le va nt Ac t/ R ul es in br ea ch of Ex pla na ti on 5 to Se ct io n 4 3B o f the Ac t. T he A sse ss in g Of f icer a cco rd in gl y res or te d to t he ad d iti on s u nde r S ec tio n 36 (1 )( va) rea d w ith Se cti on 2(2 4) (x ) of th e Ac t. 6. It i s t he ca se of t h e as se ss ee bef or e l ow er a ut ho ri tie s t h at i t has d ep osi te d t he e mp lo ye e ’s co nt ri bu tio n i n EP F a nd E SI C b ef ore the du e d ate of f ili ng of r etu rn of inc o me st ip ul ated u nd er S ec ti on 13 9(1 ) of t he Ac t. 7. W e f in d t ha t th e i d ent ic al i ss ue ha s b een de ci ded in f a v our of the a ss es see b y t he Ho n’ bl e Del hi H ig h C ou rt i n t he ca se of P r. CI T vs. Pr o In te ra ct iv e Se rv ice (In di a ) Pvt . Lt d. vi de o rde r d at ed 10. 09 .2 01 8 in IT A No. 98 3/ 20 18. Th e ext ra ct of th e j ud g ment is rep ro du ce d a s un de r: “ I n v i e w o f t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h e D i v i s i o n B e n c h o f De l h i H i g h C o u r t i n C o m m i s s i o n e r o f I n c o m e - T a x v e r s u s A i m i l L i m i t e d , ( 2 0 1 0 ) 3 2 1 I T R 5 0 8 ( D e l ) t h e i s s u e i s c o v e r e d a g a i n s t t h e R e v e n u e a n d , t h e r e f o r e , n o s u b s t a n t i a l q u e s t i o n o f l a w a r i s e s f o r c o n s i d e r a t i on i n t h i s a p p e a l . T h e l e g i s l a t i v e i n t e n t w a s / i s t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e am o u n t p a i d i s a l l o w e d a s a n e x p e n d i t u r e o n l y w h e n p a y m e n t i s a c t ua l l y m a d e . We d o n o t t h i n k t h a t t h e l e g i s l a t i v e i n t e n t a n d o b j e c ti v e i s t o t r e a t b e l a t e d p a y m e n t o f E m p l o y e e ' s P r o v i d e n t F u n d ( E P F ) a n d E m p l o y e e ' s I.T.A. No.5639/DEL/2017 3 S t a t e I n s u r a n c e S c h e m e ( E S I ) a s d e e m e d i n c o m e o f t he e m p l o y e r u n d e r S e c t i o n 2 ( 2 4 ) ( x ) o f t h e A c t . ” 8. Re spe ctf u ll y f o ll o wi ng t he bi ndi n g pre ce den ts of H on’ bl e Del hi Hi gh Co urt , we d ir ect th e As se s sin g Of f ice r to al lo w th e cl ai m of the as ses se e a nd del et e th e a dd it io n. Hen ce , t he g ro un d s of ap pea l rai se d b y th e as se ss ee ar e a ll ow ed . 9. W e h av e ca ref u ll y per us ed the or de rs of the a ut ho ri tie s b elo w. W e f in d t hat de l a ye d p a yme nt of e mp lo ye e ’ s co nt rib ut io n t o EP F/ ES IC i s n ot di sa ll ow ab le as th e a men d men ts to Sec ti on 36( 1) (v a) a nd S ec tio n 4 3B ef f ect ed b y Fi na nc e Ac t, 202 1 we re app li ca bl e pr os pec t ive l y i n re la ti on t o As ses s me nt Y ear 2 02 1-2 2 an d su bse qu en t ye ar s. The ref o re, th e c lai m of de du ct io n of con tr ib ut io n to E mp lo ye e ’s St a te In su ra nc e Sc he me ( ES I) a nd P ro vid en t F un d u/s .3 6( 1) (v a) c ou ld not be de ni ed to th e as se ss ee in As se s s ment Y ear 20 14- 15 i n qu est io n o n th e b as is of a me nd me nt s ma de b y Fi na nc e Act , 20 21 . F or th is pro po si ti on , we f in d su pp ort f ro m th e dec is io n of the C o- or di nat e Be nch of Tri bu na l in th e c as e of Th e Co nti ne nt al Res ta ur an t an d Ca f é C o mp any v s. I TO as r ep or te d in (2 0 21 ) 9 1 IT R (Tr ib . )(S .N . ) 6 0 (B an g. ) an d Ad ya r A na nd a Bh av an Sw e ets In di a P. Lt d. vs . AC IT , I TA N o. 40 2 an d 40 3/ Ch ny/ 20 21 o r der dat ed 08. 12 .2 02 1. C on se que nt l y, the a ct io n of re ve nue o n th is sco re i s s et asi de a nd ca nc el le d . 10. In th e res ul t, t he ap pea l of th e as se ss ee is a ll ow ed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/04/2022. Sd/- Sd/- [NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY] [PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 21/04/2022 Prabhat