SIMPLE LOGIC IT PRIVATE LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A) NFAC, MUMBAI

O R D E R

Per Amarjit Singh (AM): The present appeal filed by the assesse is directed against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 18.08.2021 for A.Y. 2019-20. The assesse has raised the following grounds before us: “1. The Learned CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi erred in disallowing claim of ESIC and provident fund even though the payment was made within due date and added it to the total income of the Appellant.

2. The Learned CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi failed to consider the submission given in tabular form wherein the ESIC and PF paid date wise were given.

3. The Learned CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi, failed to consider that the Appellant has made payment on and before 15/04/2019 which within the due date as mentioned in Sec 36(1) (va) and much more prior to due date of filling of ROI as the due date for the AY 2019-20 which was extended to 31/10/2019 and therefore the assessee is eligible for deduction of payment for ESIC and provident fund provident.

4. The Learned CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi, failed to consider various judge ments covering the subject matter.

P a g e | Simple Logic IT Private Ld. Vs. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi 5. The appellant craves leave to add, to alter, vary or cancel any of the above grounds of appeal

2. During the course of appellate proceedings before us neither anybody has attended from the side of the assessee nor filed any other submission in spite of serving the notice of hearing, therefore, the appeal of the revenue is adjudicated after hearing the ld. D.R and after considering the material available on record.

3. Fact in brief is that ITAT vide dated 21.04.2022 has allowed the claim of the assessee with respect to deduction pertaining to amount deposited towards employee’s contribution to PF/ESIC beyond the due date for payment as specified in the PF/ESIC Act but paid before the due date of filing return of income after following the decision of ITAT vide ITA No. 6425/Mum/2017 and 6426/Mum/2017 dated 27.07.2021 in the case of DCIT Vs. M/s Maharashtra Tourism Development Corporation Ltd.

4. Subsequently, the ITAT vide order MA No. 427/Mum/2022 dated 15.03.2023 has recalled the impugned order of the Tribunal after considering the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT-1 Civil Appeal No. 2833 of 2016 dated 12.10.2022.

5. Heard the ld. D.R and perused the material on record. Fact in brief is that the CPC Banglore found that assessee has not deposited the employee’s contribution towards PF/ESIC to the amount of Rs.16,25,520/- to the government account within the due date as prescribed in PF/ESIC Act. Therefore, the CPC has disallowed the amount of Rs. 16,26,520/- while processing the return of income u/s 143(1) of the Act on account of late deposit of employee’s contribution towards PF/ESIC u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s 2(24)(x) of the Act to the government account beyond the due date as prescribed in the PF/ESIC of the Act.