NISHA SINGH,THANE vs. ADIT, CPC, PALGHAR

The appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi /CIT(A) passed u/sec 143(1) and U/sec 250 of the Ac. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

That the Ld. AO grossly erred in law and in facts of the case in making disallowance of Rs 27,77,677/- u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act relying only upon the audit report filed by CA and without allowing any opportunity of being heard in this regard. 3That the disallowance of Rs27,77,677/- made by LdAO is not tenable under the law because the said amount constituted Rs11,79,540/- employees contribution and Rs. 15,92,234/- of employers' contribution and the stated fact is evident from challans of ESI and EPF paid 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or delete any grounds of appeal

Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT(A). The CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, submissions of the assessee and findings of the AO but has confirmed the action of the AO in respect of delay deposit of ESIC and PF and sustained the disallowance and dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the CIT(A)order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Honble Tribunal.

We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Ld. AR contentions are that the CIT(A) has erred in not considering the various factual aspects with respect to the employees/ employer contribution towards PF and ESIC. The Ld.AR emphasized that the assessee has submitted the details as called for by the authorities on the disputed issue. The assessee is now filling the application for admission of additional evidences under Rule 29 of ITAT rules with (i) Chart specifying employer and employee contribution and admin charges paid in respect of PF & ESIC (ii) Copies of Provident Fund challans (iii) Copies of ESIC challans and (iv) Revised tax audit report of auditor. Whereas these details were not available earlier and could not produce before the lower authorities. Further the evidences play a important role in decision making in the adjudicating proceedings. We find the return of income was processed under section 143(1) of the Act and therefore considering the facts, circumstances and additional evidences, the assessee should not suffer for non filing of material information, as the evidences played vital role in decision making and admit the additional evidence. Accordingly, to meet the ends of justice, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the entire disputed issues along with the additional evidence to the file of the assessing officer to decide afresh on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information. Accordingly, allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.