SMT. VEENA AGARWAL,KANPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER (SPECIAL RANGE), KANPUR

This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section 253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Amit Kumar, D.R.

The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and is engaged in the business of trading of cloths, suiting, shirtings etc. under the name and style as V. K. Enterprises. The assessee has filed her return of income on 30/12/2020 declaring total income of Rs.4,34,39,040/- which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act by CPC on 29/11/2021 at total income of Rs.4,59,32,212/- by making disallowance of Rs.24,22,448/- under section 36(1)(va) of the Act on the basis of information contained in Form No.3CD. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A) who has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved further, the assessee is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing before us, assessee was represented by none. We have heard learned D.R. for Revenue and have perused the materials on record. The assessee’s grievance is that the CPC was not justified in not accepting the claim of the assessee that the payment towards ESI/PF was made in time. The learned CIT(A) has also not considered the submissions made before him that ESI/PF was paid in time, though the same was not mentioned in audit report. However, later on the same was arranged and was furnished before the learned CIT(A) during appellate proceeding. 5. In view of the foregoing, we set aside the impugned appellate order dated 10/05/2023 of the learned CIT(A) and remand the issue back to CPC to pass order afresh after verifying whether the payment towards ESI/PF

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.