AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue, u/s 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack, arising out of the order passed in I.T.A. No. 269/CTK/2005 dt. 30.8.2006 for the assessment year 2000-01, proposing following substantial questions of law.
i. Whether the learned I.T.A.T. has not erred in allowing the deduction u/s. 43B on account of employer''s payment towards E.S.I. & E.P.F. even though they were paid much beyond the due dates as applicable to those assessment years.
ii. Whether the learned I.T.A.T. has not erred in law in interpreting that the amendment to the first proviso of Section 43B is retrospective and clarificatory in nature even though no such interpretation is available from the clear language of the provisions.
The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction of payments towards E.S.I. and E.P.F. which remained outstanding on the ground that the deposit was not within the due date as per Section 36(1)(va) and Section 43B of the Income Tax Act. Relying upon the judgment of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of ALLIED MOTORS (P) LTD. ETC. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX., , the C.I.T.(A) upheld the plea of the assessee. It was held that Section 43B added by the Finance Act, 1987 was clarificatory and, thus, has to be taken to be retrospective. This view has been upheld by the Tribunal.
We have heard learned counsel for the Revenue.
It is not disputed that the matter is covered by the judgment of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Allied Motors Pvt. Ltd. (supra).
Accordingly, no substantial question of law arises.
The appeal is dismissed.