SAVITA BAPPA JOGDAND,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX AUTHORITY, PUNE
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”एस एम सी” Ɋायपीठ पुणेमŐ।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE
BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.953/PUN/2025
िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year: 2021-22
Savita Bappa Jogdand,
Dyansagar Society, Balajin
Ganeshnagar Nr.Indraprast,
Pune Nashik Road,
Medankarwadi Post, Chakan,
Ta Khed, Dist. Pune – 410501. Maharashtra.
V s
The Income Tax
Authority, Pune.
PAN: AMYPJ7084P
Appellant/ Assessee
Respondent / Revenue
Assessee by Shri Priyanka Tayade Rathi – CA
Revenue by Shri Rajesh Haladkar – Addl.CIT(DR)
Date of hearing
25/06/2025
Date of pronouncement 26/06/2025
आदेश/ ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-Kochi passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated
06.03.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for A.Y.2021-22 dated 10.12.2022. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :
ITA No.935/PUN/2025 [A]
2
“The appellant filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunals of Income
Tax, Appeal, against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income
Tax, Appeal. The appellant is not satisfied with the result of the same &
challenges the entire tax liabilities including interest in the above proceeding.
1) While disposing of the appeal order, the Commissioner of Income
Tax, Appeal did not consider the audit report filed by the appellant.
2) The Appellant authority dismissed the appeal on the grounds the appeal is treated as infructuous, without considering the facts of the case. The appellant has submitted an audit report U/s 44AB of the Act
& disclosed the required details U/s 43 B of the Act in para 26 b of the audit report. Which is unaccepted & simply confirms the order mechanically which is unjustified
Being aggrieved by the said order the appellant has preferred an appeal to the Hon'ble Tribunals of Income Tax, Appeal.”
Findings & Analysis :
In this case the only issue for our consideration is disallowance of Rs.7,54,838/- made u/s 143(1) by Asst.Director of Income Tax (Centralized Processing Center) vide order dated 10/12/2022. Admittedly in the Audit Report the Auditor has reported the GST Liability of Rs.7,54,838/- outstanding on 31stMarch of the year. However, it has been brought to our notice by the Ld.AR that assessee has paid the said GST Liability on 20/04/2021.Copy of the challan demonstrating the payment of GST was filed in the paper
ITA No.935/PUN/2025 [A]
3
book. These details were also filed by the Assessee before the Ld.CIT(A). However, Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal on the ground that assessee has filed rectification application.
As per section 250 of the Act, the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal) is duty bound to adjudicate the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. In this case, the ld.CIT(A) has not considered the evidence filed by the assessee and just dismissed the appeal.
Be it as it may be, since the assessee had filed the details of payment before the Ld.CIT(A) and Ld.CIT(A) has not recorded any adverse inference means the Ld.CIT(A) has verified and accepted it.
1 Section 43B is reproduced here as under : “Certain deductions to be only on actual payment. 43B. Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, a deduction otherwise allowable under this Act in respect of— (a) any sum payable by the assessee by way of tax, duty, cess or fee, by whatever name called, under any law for the time being in force, or (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) shall be allowed (irrespective of the previous year in which the liability to pay such sum was incurred by the assessee according to the method of accounting regularly employed by him) only in computing the income
ITA No.935/PUN/2025 [A]
4
referred to in section 28 of that previous year in which such sum is actually paid by him :
Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply in relation to any sum which is actually paid by the assessee on or before the due date applicable in his case for furnishing the return of income under sub-section (1) of section 139 in respect of the previous year in which the liability to pay such sum was incurred as aforesaid and the evidence of such payment is furnished by the assessee along with such return.”
2 Thus, as per Proviso to section 43B if the GST liability is paid before the due date of filling return of income, then it is allowable in the year. In this case admittedly the assessee has paid the GST liability on 20/04/2021 which was before the due date of filling return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act.
3 In these facts and circumstances of the case the Assessing Officer(AO) is directed to delete the addition of Rs.7,54,838/- made u/s.43B of the Act in the order u/s.143(1) of the Act.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26 June, 2025. (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 26 June, 2025/ SGR
ITA No.935/PUN/2025 [A]
5
आदेशकᳱᮧितिलिपअᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant.
2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent.
3. The CIT(A), concerned.
4. The Pr. CIT, concerned.
5. िवभागीयᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “एस एम सी” बᱶच,
पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune.
6. गाडᭅफ़ाइल / Guard File.
आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,
////
Senior Private Secretary
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे/ITAT, Pune.