99 HIND SURAKSHA PVT. LTD.,HARYANA vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 604/DEL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 September 2021AY 2018-1912 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the PF and ESI were deposited before the filing of the return, which was within the extended due date. Following its own coordinate bench decisions, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the disallowances.

What were the facts?

The assessee's return was processed under Section 143(1) where disallowances were made for late deposit of provident fund and ESI. The National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dismissed the appeal, relying on a Gujarat High Court decision.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance for late deposit of PF and ESI is justified when deposits were made before filing the return, even if after the original due date but within the extended due date.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA

Hearing: 30/09/2021Pronounced: 30/09/2021
1.

605/Del/2021 are two separate appeals by the assessee preferred against two separate orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 09.04.2021 pertaining to A.Y.2018-19.

2.

is the appeal against the order framed u/s. 143 (1) of the Act and is an appeal against the assessment order framed u/s. 154 of the Act.

3.

We will first address to the appeal in .

4.

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that while processing the return u/s.143 (1) of the Act CPC disallowed Rs.127225/- on account of late deposit of provident fund and Rs.171402/- on account of late deposit of ESI.

5.

Assessee assailed the order before the NFAC but the NFAC was of the firm belief that the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat State Road Transportation 366 ITR 170 fairly apply on the facts of the case and following the same, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

6.

Before me the strong reliance was placed on the decision of the coordinate bench in the case of Azamgarh Steel & Power Private Limited in order dated 31.05.2021. It is the say of the counsel that this Tribunal while deciding a similar quarrel in favour of the assessee has duly considered the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court (supra). The counsel further relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Indian Geotechnical Services in ITA No. 622/Del/2018 order dated 27.08.2021.

7.

Per contra the DR strongly supported findings of the lower authorities.

8.

I have carefully considered the orders of the authorities below. The details of the deposit of PF/ ESI is as under :-

9.

I find that the return was filed on 26.10.2018 and for the year under consideration the extended due date for filing original return was 31.10.2018. This means that the PF and the ESI were not only deposited within the financial year itself but also before filing of the return. I find that this Tribunal in the case of Azamgarh Steel and Power Private Limited (supra) have considered the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court relied upon by the CIT(A) and held as under :-

10.

I further find that this Tribunal in the case of Indian Geotechnical Services (supra) has also considered the amendment brought to the relevant provisions and decided a similar quarrel as under :-

11.

Respectfully following the decision of this Tribunal (surpa), I direct the NFAC to delete the disallowance of Rs.1441627/-.

12.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

13.

Since I have decided the appeal in becomes otiose.

14.

Decision announced in the open court in the presence of both the representatives on 30.09.2021.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →