Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal arose from an order of the CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal for condonation of delay and non-prosecution. The original disallowance was made by CPC for late payment of PF/ESI.
Held
The Tribunal held that there was a clerical error in the Tax Audit Report and the CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay. The case was restored to the AO to verify payment dates and restrict disallowance to the extent of delay.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for delay and non-prosecution without considering the condonation request, and whether the disallowance for late payment of PF/ESI was correctly made.
Sections Cited
143(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Before: HON’BLE SHRI RAJ PAL YADAV & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
(िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/s Five Force Security Solutions P. Ltd. ACIT 2(1) बनाम/ SCF No 20, Top Floor Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Phase 5, Mohali (Punjab)-160055 Chandigarh 160017 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AABCF-4798-C (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Shubham (CA) – Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 04-03-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 12-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 19-06-2024 in the matter of an intimation issued by CPC u/s 143(1) on 13-11-2022. The CPC made disallowance of late payment of PF / ESI against which the assessee preferred first appeal. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for want of condonation of delay of 27 days and also for non-prosecution of appeal on the part of the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
It is the submission of Ld. AR that there was clerical error in Tax Audit Report since substantial payments of PF / ESI contribution were made before due date and therefore, the disallowance thereof was unjustified. To support the same, Ld. AR placed on record corrigendum issued by Tax Auditor and also filed copies of PF / ESI payment challans. The Ld. Sr. DR opposed any interference in the impugned order.
Apparently, there is a mistake in filling correct particulars in Tax Audit Report. The Ld. CIT(A), in our opinion, erred in not condoning small delay of 27 days. Nevertheless we set aside the impugned order and restore the impugned issue back to the file of Ld. AO to verify the actual dates of payment and restrict the impugned disallowance to the extent of delay only. The assessee is directed to supply the requisite information.
The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 12-03-2025.