Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 18 (0.24 seconds)Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, ... vs The Acit Circle, 2(1), Ujjain on 29 January, 2020
In light of the binding pronouncement in Checkmate
Services, I hold that employees' contribution deposited after
4
Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit Bilaspur Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.)
ITA Nos.172, 173, 174 & 175/RPR/2026
the due dates under the EPF enactments is not allowable
under section 36(1)(va). Accordingly, the disallowance in
respect of employees' contribution to the extent of
Rs.20,04,753/- is confirmed for violation of Section 36(1)(va).
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Checkmate Services P Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax-I on 12 October, 2022
"8.(i). I have examined the assessment order and rival
contentions on the disallowance made in respect of
employees' contribution to EPF deposited beyond the due
dates under the respective welfare statutes. Statutorily,
section 2(24)(x) treats employees' contributions received by
the employer as income; a deduction is permitted by section
36(1)(va) only if such sums are credited to the employees'
accounts in the relevant fund on or before the due date under
the said statutes. Section 43B, on the other hand, regulates
deduction of, inter alia, employer's contribution on actual-
payment basis up to the due date of filing of return under
section 139(1). The provisions operate in distinct spheres.
The Supreme Court in Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. v. CIT has
conclusively held that section 43B does not govern employees'
contribution under section 36(1)(va) and cannot extend the
statutory due date; amounts paid beyond the due dates
under the relevant Acts are not deductible, even if paid before
the return-filing due date. The Court also noted the Finance
Act, 2021 insertions; Explanation 2 to section 36(1)(va) and
Explanation 5 to section 43B which clarify this position.
Earlier decisions that applied Alom Extrusions to employees'
contributions cannot survive in view of the Supreme Court's
ratio; Alom Extrusions concerned employer's contribution
under section 43B and was confined thereto.
The Income Tax Act, 1961
National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 4 December, 1996
In our view, the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power
Company Ltd. Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) provides that any legal
issue which goes to the root of the matter and is established
through legal principles, the assessee can take up and raise
such legal issue at any appellate forum irrespective of
whether the assessee had raised such legal issue at the sub-