RAJENDRA SINGH BHATI,JAISALMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, BARMER
Facts
The assessee's appeal challenged the confirmation of disallowance for delayed payment of employee's contribution for AY 2020-21. There was a delay of 51 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, attributed to administrative oversight and the recent discovery of the pending appeal.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. However, after considering the facts and the ruling of the Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd., the Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the impugned order.
Key Issues
Whether the disallowance of employee's contribution due to delayed payment, as per Section 36(1)(va) of the IT Act, is justified in light of the Apex Court's ruling?
Sections Cited
36(1)(va)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH (Virtual) JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 668/Jodh/2024 (Assessment Year 2022-23) Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Barmer. Rajendra Singh Bhati, 798, Satyanarayan Marg, Gandhi Colony, Jaisalmer-345001. PAN No. ALJPB1254D Assessee by None. Revenue by Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT (Sr. D.R.) Date of Hearing 19.05.2025. Date of Pronouncement 17.06.2025. DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, A.M. : ORDER This appeals by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals, ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Mumbai, (hereinafter referred to "the JCIT appeal"] dated 30/04/2024 in respect to the Assessment Year 2020-21 challenging therein in confirmation of the disallowance for delayed payment of employee's contribution.
There was a delay of 51 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The reason for the delay was explained in the application that the order was not placed in the office of the advocate by the staff before and that it was only at the time of filing a new appeal of the company on 04.08.2024, M/S Zephyrsun Electro Mech Private Limited, of which assessee is a Director, it came into light, that the appeal against this impugned order of the assessee was also pending. Therefore, he requested that short delay of 51 days may be condoned with support of notarized affidavit. The DR has no objection. Accordingly, the short delay of 51 days in filing this appeal is condoned end appeal is admitted.
At the time of hearing, none attended for the assessee. However, with the assistance of the learned DR, we have gone through the facts of the case and heard the appeal as covered matter in favour of revenue by the judgment of the honourable apex court in the case of Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd.. There were conflicting judicial views on the due date which was laid to rest by Hon'ble Apex Court (SC) in the case of Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. wherein it was held that employee's contributions if not paid within the due date specified under the relevant Act were not allowable under section 36(1)(va) of the IT Act.
Accordingly, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on 17/06/2025 in open court (LALIET KUMAR) (DR. MITHA LAL MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated:17./06/2025 Copies to: (1) The appellant. (2) The respondent. (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By Oder
