M/S. R.K. SWAMY LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NON CORP. CIRCLE-10(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1945/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 July 2026AY 2019-203 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the disallowance made by the CPC under Section 43B, agreeing with the CIT(A) that the amendment in the Finance Act, 2021 was declaratory and retrospective. The Tribunal rejected the assessee's contention that the issue was debatable and not subject to adjustment under Section 143(1).

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 37 days, which was condoned. The assessee did not appear for the hearing, and the appeal was decided based on the available material. The core issue involved a disallowance made by CPC under Section 43B of the Income-tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether a disallowance under Section 43B made by CPC is valid when the assessee claims payments were made before the due date of filing the return, and if such an issue is debatable and cannot be adjusted under Section 143(1).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 43B,Section 139(1),Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Hearing: 15.06.2026Pronounced: 08.07.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ ए’ �ायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी इंटूरी रामाराव, लेखा सद एवं �ी एस.एस. िव"ने$ रिव, �ाियक सद के सम% । Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1945/Chny/2026 िनधा'रण वष'/Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/s. R K Swamy Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income No.19, Wheat Crofts Road, Tax, Nungambakkma, Non Corporate Circle 10(1), Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 034. [PAN: AACCR-2213-F] (अपीलाथ*/Appellant) (+,थ*/Respondent) अपीलाथ* की ओर से / Appellant by : None +,थ* की ओर से/Respondent by : Mr. S. Manoj Prakash, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 15.06.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 08.07.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 09.12.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Bengaluru, for the assessment year 2017-18.

2.

We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 37 days. The assessee filed an affidavit explaining the reasons to condone the said delay. On perusal of the same and upon hearing both the parties, we find

2 ITA No. 1945/Chny/2026

the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide which really prevented

the assessee in filing the appeal in time. Thus, delay of 37 days condoned.

3.

We find no representation on behalf of the assessee nor filed any

adjournment application. The assessee called absent and we proceed to

hear the ld.DR to dispose the appeal considering the material available on

record.

4.

At the outset, it is noted that the CPC, Bengaluru made disallowance

of Rs.1,73,66,420/- u/s. 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (herein after “the

Act”). The said disallowance was contested before the ld.CT(A) by stating

that all the payments were made on or before the due date of filing return

of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act. The ld.CIT(A) by considering the

assessee’s submissions and by following decision of Hon’ble Supreme

Court in the case of M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd upheld the

disallowance made by the CPC, Bengaluru. The assessee vide its grounds

before us contested that the CPC has failed to note that subject matter of

disallowance as on the date of issuing the intimation was a debatable issue

and the same cannot be subject matter of adjustment u/s. 143(1) of the Act

and prayed to delete the addition made by the CPC, Bengaluru. We note

that the ld.CIT(A) while applying the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble

3 ITA No. 1945/Chny/2026

Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt Ltd (Supra) held that the amendment in the Finance Act, 2021 is only declaratory/clarificatory in nature and are applicable with retrospective effect by necessary intendment of deeming nature. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of ld.CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance made by the CPC, Bengaluru. Further, we reject the contention of the assessee that CPC, Bengaluru has failed to note that the subject matter of disallowance as on the date of issuing intimation are debatable issue, the same cannot be the subject matter of adjustment u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed.

5.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on 08th July, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Chennai, Dated: 08.07.2026 JPV आदेश की +ितिलिप अ3ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ*/Appellant, 2.+,थ*/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु4/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय +ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड' फाईल/GF

PRASANNA Digitally signed by PRASANNA VANI JETTY VANI JETTY Date: 2026.07.09 16:06:59 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 43B

All 7,161 judgments and leading authorities on Section 43B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →