VIKAS JOSHI,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 5(2)(5) , NOIDA

PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 19.06.2023 of the National Faceless Centre (NFAC), Delhi
[hereinafter referred to as “NFAC”] arising out of the order of the ADIT, CPC Bangalore dated 21.11.2022 passed under 2
section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [herein after, the Act] for the assessment year 2021-22. 2. The assessee has raised following common ground of appeal:
1.The order of learned commissioner of income tax (appeal),
National Faceless Appeal Centre (Herein referred as Ld. CIT(A) confirming disallowance u/s 36(1) (va) to the extent of Rs 67,
93,047/- on account of alleged late deposit of employee contribution of PF for Rs. 63,24,102/- and ESI for Rs. 4,68,945/- made by Assistant Director of Income Tax CPC Bengaluru (herein after referred as AO) in 143 (1) intimation order and dismissing the appeal is bad in law and facts. The appellant assessee seek relief by way of deleting the disallowance and consequential relief of deletion of demand of tax and interest Rs. 23,54,080/-
2. The appellant craves leave to alter, amend or add any other ground of appeal either before or during the course of hearing.

3
4. Aggrieved the order the assessee filed appeal before the Ld.
NFAC. The Ld. NFAC found that the issue is squarely covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax -I in CA No. 2833/2016 vide order dated 12-10-2022 and dismissed the appeal.
5. Being aggrieved the order of Ld. NFAC the assessee has preferred the appeal before the tribunal which was dismissed by order dated 30-11-2023. Against the above order, the assessee has filed appeal before the Hon’ble High Court. The Hon’ble
High Court by order dated 24-10-2024 allowed the appeal and directed the ITAT to decide the appeal afresh.
6. We have heard the both parties and perused the materials available on record.
7. Ld. AR has filed the application to file the additional evidence in the appeal. He also submitted that the government has extended the date during the Covid period. The benefit of the extended time has not ben granted to the assessee. The 4
application filed by the assessee to file the additional evidence is allowed. The documents filed by the assessee are to be verified by the A.O. Because the additional evidence filed by the has been admitted so in the interest of justice and fair play we restored the matter to the file before the A.O. to decide the matter as afresh after giving the opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 28.05.2025. (MANISH AGARWAL)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
Date: 28.05.2025
f{x~{tÜ? fÜA cf f{x~{tÜ? fÜA cf f{x~{tÜ? fÜA cf f{x~{tÜ? fÜA cf