O.K. AUTO COMPONENTS PVT LTD,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, FARIDABAD

ITA 3584/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 January 2026AY 2019-201 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the adjustment made by the CPC, Bengaluru under section 143(1) of the Act for the late deposit of PF and ESI was not legally sustainable. The Tribunal referenced previous judgments and the Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. CIT-I, concluding that the issue was debatable at the time of intimation and should not have been processed under section 143(1).

What were the facts?

The appellant filed its return for the concerned year, which was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act. An adjustment was made regarding the late deposit of employees' share of PF and ESI, leading to a disallowance of Rs. 5,51,903/-. The assessee appealed this adjustment, arguing it was beyond the scope of section 143(1) and made without a speaking order.

What were the issues?

Whether the adjustment made by the CPC under section 143(1) for delayed deposit of PF/ESI was legally sustainable and within the scope of the AO's powers.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va),Section 143(1),Section 143(3),Section 2(24)(x),Section 139(1)

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 ‘E’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN

For Appellant: Ms. Airik Singla, Advocate
For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr.DR
Hearing: 09/12/2025Pronounced: 29/01/2026

PER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (J.M.):

1.

This appeal is directed against the order dated 31.03.25 of passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), ACIT/JCIT(A), Ranchi [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] wherein the adjustment made vide

1 O.K. Auto Components Pvt. Ltd. intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act by the CPC, Bangaluru were confirmed and appeal was dismissed.

2.

The facts in brief as culled out from the order of the authorities below are that the appellant/assessee filed its return for the concerned year

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 36(1)(va)

All 6,054 judgments and leading authorities on Section 36(1)(va) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →