Income Tax

Actual date of salary payment to be considered for disallowance of EPF u/s 36(1)(va) – ITAT

Date of actual payment of salary to be considered for disallowance of EPF u/s 36(1)(va) for delay in deposit within 15 days – ITAT

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 3732 (2023) (05) ITAT

Important Case Laws relied upon:
Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. Vs CIT-1, [2022] 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC)
Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. vs. DCIT (2022) 138 taxmann.com 571

In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) , National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) in confirming disallowance  u/s 36(1)(va) by CPC vide order passed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

The assessee was a partnership firm. The return of income of the firm was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act making disallowance towards delay in payment of employees contribution to PF and ESI u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act.

The assessee contended that no disallowance can be made u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act towards employees contribution to EPF and ESI.

The assessee submitted that there was inadvertent error while filing Form 3CD in mentioning the correct qualifying dates of remittances.

The assessee also contended that the salary for two month was paid in the subsequent months, therefore the due dates have to be considered from the actual date of payment of salary.

It was submitted that unless the salary is actually paid to the employees, employees contribution to the PF and ESI cannot be made.

The Tribunal observed that the issue of disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) u/s 143(1)(a) is settled by the Hon’ble High Court and rejected the contention of the assessee in this regard.

Tribunal observed that the coordinate bench of the ITAT has held that time-limit for making payment in respect of contribution to the provident fund within 15 days should be considered from the month during which the wages/salary is actually disbursed irrespective of  month to which the same relates.

Accordingly, the Tribunal remitted this issue to the Assessing Officer (AO) with a direction to examine and decide the issue in the light of the said judgment of the ITAT.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Non-deduction of TDS does not make transaction as unexplained in the hands of deductee – ITAT

Mere non-deduction of TDS by the deductor on a transaction does not change the character of the transaction to make…

2 days ago
  • ICAI

Last date to submit MEF 2026-27 extended to 09.09.2026

ICAI has extended the last date to online submit Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF)- 2026-27 from 29th August 2026 to 9th…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Validity of demand u/s 156 for default u/s 115-O, if assessment order u/s 143(3) has Nil demand

Can a demand notice be issued u/s 156 for non-payment of Dividend tax u/s 115-O, when as per assessment order…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Issue already examined and adjudicated by CIT(Appeals), can’t be reopened on same set of facts

The issue already examined and adjudicated by the quasi-judicial authority, i.e., CIT(Appeals), cannot be reopened on the same set of…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

TDS can’t be denied for non deposit of tax deducted by the deductor – High Court

One TDS is deducted, credit has to follow, failure of deductor to deposit the amount to the credit of the…

6 days ago
  • Income Tax

Cash withdrawal from bank can’t be taxed u/s 69C as unexplained expenditure – ITAT

Merely because assessee did not explain purpose of cash withdrawal from bank, it can not be taxed u/s 69C as…

6 days ago