ANIL KUMAR MALIK,HARYANA vs. JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER, RANGE CODE 53, AO NUMBER-1, CIRCLE 1(1) GURGAON, HARYANA
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLEA.YR. : 2020-21
The Assessee has filed the instant Appeal against the Order of the Ld.
Addl/JCIT(Appeal)-1, Jaipur dated 28.10.2024, relating to assessment year
2020-21. 2. At the time of hearing, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld.
CIT(A) made a substantial error, both factually and legally, by mis-interpreting the provisions of Section 36(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) and Section 43B, alongwith various legal precedents relevant to the assessment year 2020-21, thereby upholding the disallowance of Rs. 10,84,626/- due to the late payment
2 | P a g e of employee contribution to ESIC/EPF. Per contra, Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A).
3. We have both the parties and perused the records. We find that the issue involved in this appeal is no longer res integra and has been decided in favour of the Revenue by the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT-I., wherein it has been held that payment towards employee’s contribution to ESIC/PF after the due date prescribed under the relevant statutes is not allowable deduction. Hence, Ld. CIT(A) has taken a correct decision of dismissal of appeal of the assessee, by relying upon the aforesaid precedent of the Hon’ble Apex Court, therefore, we uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and reject the grounds raised in the instant appeal.
4. In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 15/04/2025. (MAHAVIR SINGH)
VICE PRESIDENT
SRBHATNAGAR