IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Miscellaneous Application No.35/PUN/2023 (arising out of ITA No.318/PUN/2021) Assessment Year : 2018-19 ITO, Ward-2(1), Nashik Vs. Shobha Pradeep Singh, Room No.82, Jadhav Sankul, Kamatwada, Ambad, Nashik – 422 010, PAN : BIEPS6442R (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sanket Joshi Revenue by : Shri Suhas Kulkarni Date of Hearing : 07-07-2023 Date of Pronouncement : 10-07-2023 ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This Miscellaneous application has been moved by the Revenue against the order dated 22-06-2022 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No.318/PUN/2021 in relation to the A.Y. 2018-19. 2. At the outset, the ld. DR submitted that the addition made u/s.36(1)(va) in respect of contribution of employees to ESIC and PF deposited beyond the stipulated period under the respective Acts was required to be disallowed by virtue of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate M.A.No.35/PUN/2023 2 Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC), as against the same having been allowed by the Tribunal in the impugned order. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. The Tribunal in the impugned order has allowed deduction u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act on the premise that the deposits were made prior to the due date u/s 139(1) of the Act. However, the issue of making disallowance u/s.36(1)(va) in respect of Employees share of ESIC and PF deposited beyond the due date under the respective Acts but before the time limit for filing the return u/s.139(1) is no more res integra in view of the later judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (supra). The Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the deduction u/s.36(1)(va) can be allowed only if the employees’ share in the relevant funds is deposited by the employer before the due date stipulated in respective Acts and further that the due date u/s.139(1) of the Act is alien for this purpose. The above enunciation of law by the highest court of the land, denying the benefit of deduction, has rendered the order u/s 254(1) erroneous necessitating its rectification in terms of section M.A.No.35/PUN/2023 3 254(2) of the Act. The impugned order is, therefore, modified accordingly. 4. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application is allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 10 th July, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT प ु णे Pune; दनांक Dated : 10 th July, 2023 Satish आदेश क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of the Order is forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant; 2. यथ / The Respondent; 3. The CIT concerned, Pune 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “B” / DR ‘B’, ITAT, Pune; 5. गाड फाईल / Guard file आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune M.A.No.35/PUN/2023 4 Date 1. Draft dictated on 07-07-2023 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 07-07-2023 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. *