ORRIONSTAR INNOVATES PRIVATE LIMITED,PANIPAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, PANIPAT, PANIPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5875/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 August 2026AY 2021-20223 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee could not adequately explain the delay due to space limitations for submissions. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the impugned order was set aside and remitted back to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure related to EPF & ESI payments. The assessee contended that a word limit on the Income Tax portal prevented adequate explanation, and they were not given sufficient opportunity to be heard by the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was provided with adequate opportunity to explain the delay in EPF/ESI payments, and if the disallowance was justified given the portal's submission limitations.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “E” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI VIMAL KUMAR & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Shri Kishan Lal Kalra, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Tarun Sharda, Sr. DR
Hearing: 18.08.2026

ITA No.5875/DEL/2026 ORRIONSTAR INNOVATES PRIVATE LIMITED IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.5875/DEL/2026 Assessment Year: 2021-22 ORRIONSTAR INNOVATES PRIVATE LIMITED, Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, C/o Krishan Lal Kalra, Advocate, . Income Tax Office, 857-858/8, Sethi Chowk, Ward-3, Panipat, Panipat, Haryana 132103. Haryana 132103. PAN No. AACCO1866D Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Kishan Lal Kalra, Adv. Revenue by Shri Tarun Sharda, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 18.08.2026 Pronouncement on 18.08.2026 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. This appeal arises from order dated 27.03.2026, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), by Ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals)-2, Delhi.

1.1 In this case, the Ld. AO – CPC disallowed expenditure u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act on account of EPF & ESI payments. It appears that the assessee could not adequately respond to the disallowance proposed due to a word limit prescribed on the Income Tax portal.

1.2 The aggrieved assessee approached the first appellate authority where also he could not succeed on the basis of finding given on pages 18

ITA No.5875/DEL/2026 ORRIONSTAR INNOVATES PRIVATE LIMITED to 21. Briefly, the ld. Addl./JCIT(A) followed the cases of Checkmate Services reported in 448 ITR 519 (SC) to hold the issue against the assessee. The aggrieved assessee has approached the ITAT with grounds challenging the action of authorities below and also stating that adequate opportunity of being heard was not provided by either of the authorities below.

2.

Before us the Ld. AR brought to our notice the fact that the assessee had good and sufficient reasons for any delay in complying with the payments pertaining to EPF & ESI. It was the submission that sufficient opportunity was not provided for explaining the case of the assessee. The Ld. AR took us through the facts as mentioned in various documents filed in the paper book.

2.1 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.

3.

We have considered the rival submissions and have gone through the records before us. We find that due to reasons of space provided for filing written submissions the assessee could not adequately explain the alleged delay in making payment on account of EPF & ESI. Accordingly, in the interests of substantive justice, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remit the same back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment. The assessee would file his submissions in detail and the Ld. AO would consider the same before passing any order.

ITA No.5875/DEL/2026 ORRIONSTAR INNOVATES PRIVATE LIMITED 4. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18.08.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (VIMAL KUMAR) (SANJAY AWASTHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 10.09.2026 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S. Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 36(1)(va)

All 6,054 judgments and leading authorities on Section 36(1)(va) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →