Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return of income for AY 2019-20 declaring a total income under section 115JC. The issue pertains to the disallowance of Rs. 8,77,670/- paid towards GST, which was allegedly paid subsequently before the submission of a detailed return.
Held
The Tribunal held that technicalities should not obstruct substantial justice. While acknowledging a potential mistake, the Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for verification of subsequent tax payment, in line with the spirit of section 43B.
Key Issues
Whether disallowance of GST payment made subsequently is sustainable, and if the matter should be remanded for verification of such payment.
Sections Cited
115JC, 43B, 154
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, AM
order dated 28/11/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/Addl/JCIT(A)–2, Vadodara [for short, “ld.
CIT(A)”] for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019–20. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
“1. Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(Appeals)was justified in affirming the order passed under section 154 by CPC pertaining to disallowance of payment made during the year under consideration pertaining to GST to the tune of `. 8,77,670/–.”
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual filed his return of income on 30.09.2029 for Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019– 20 (within extended due date: 31.10.2019) declaring total income of `. 4,22,710/– under section 115JC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The solitary bone of contention in this issue is whether the addition of `. 8,77,670/– towards unpaid Goods and Service Tax at year end is at all sustainable particularly in view of the fact, the same was paid subsequently prior to submission of detailed. The ld. AR submitted that it was a mistake on the part of the Auditor but we are not impressed by her argument because there was ample time the Audit Report and submission of revised return, moreover this Bench critically deprecated the attitude of threshing application upon fellow professional during absence.
The ld. DR vehemently submitted that the appeal is dismissed in keeping in view of the fact that the appeal emanates from the order under section 154 and there is the mistake apparent on record.
We have given a thoughtful consideration in the subject technicalities should not come as a barrier for rendering substantial justice. Accordingly it is deem fit to restore the matter back to the file Jurisdictional Assessing Officer only for the limited purpose of verification of tax paid subsequently. This direction is in tandem with letter and spirit of section 43B of the Act.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 23/02/2026