RAJENDRA KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA, DURG,DURG vs. ITO, NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

ITA 744/RPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 December 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member)7 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on delay without considering merits. Applying principles of natural justice, it directed the CIT(A) to provide a final opportunity to the assessee to file a condonation petition under Section 249(3). The CIT(A) must first decide on the delay condonation and, if condoned, then address the merits, specifically considering the Supreme Court's decision in *Checkmate Services* and the timeliness of the deposits according to statutes.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2020-21, where an employee's contribution of Rs. 7,69,000/- to ESI/PF was disallowed by the A.O./CPC due to delayed payment. The assessee argued that the payment was made before the due date under Section 139(1) and that Explanation 2 to Section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B was prospective from AY 2022-23. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as time-barred by almost three years, without the assessee filing a condonation petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing an appeal as time-barred without providing an opportunity for condonation of delay under Section 249(3). 2. Whether employee's contributions to ESI/PF, if deposited beyond the statutory due date but before the return filing due date under Section 139(1), should be disallowed for AY 2020-21, considering the prospective application of Explanation 2 to Section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154(2)(B),Section 154(7),Section 154(8),Section 155,Section 139(1),Section 36(1)(va),Section 43B,Section 249(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Hearing: 12.12.2025Pronounced: 12.12.2025

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM

The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, dated 14.11.2025 for the assessment year 2020-21 as per the following grounds of appeal:

“1. THAT SECTION 154(2)(B) SAYS AS UNDER-shall make such amendment for rectifying any such mistake which has been brought to its notice by the assessee 69[or by the deductor] 70 [or by the collector), and where the authority concerned is 71[the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or] the 72[*] 73[C

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 154(7)

All 47 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154(7) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →