ZAHIR KASAM MEMON,VASAI vs. ADDL-JCIT (A)-2 CHENNAI, CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s order, which confirmed the disallowance of employee's contribution based on Supreme Court and Madras High Court precedents, does not require interference. The tribunal also noted consistency with its own prior decisions.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal concerns AY 2019-20. The CPC disallowed Rs. 208.26 Lacs for failure to deposit employer's/employee's contribution to ESI/PF before due dates. The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance for employer's contribution but confirmed it for employee's contribution.
What were the issues?
Whether disallowance of employee's contribution to ESI/PF not deposited by due dates is permissible under Section 143(1) and if it aligns with judicial precedents.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT1,392 citing143 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · SC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद# एवं माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग&र, "ाियक सद# के सम'। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Mr.Zahir Kasam Memon Addl / JCIT (A)-2, बनाम Memon Brothers, Piniarwada PNE-C-(72)(1) Kumbharwada, Zenda Bazar, Chennai. / Vs. Vasai West, Maharashtra – 401 201. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AEMPM-1407-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 30-04-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 06-05-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2019-20 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 19-12-2023 in the matter of an intimation issued by CPC u/s 143(1) of the Act on 14-07-2020. At the time of hearing none appeared for the assessee. The registry has noted a delay of 5 days in the appeal. Considering the period of delay, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.
In the intimation, CPC disallowed a sum of Rs.208.26 Lacs on account of failure to deposit Employer’s / Employees’ contribution to ESI / PF before due date as specified in respective welfare acts. This amount include Employee’s Contribution of Rs.111.01 Lacs which was not deposited by due dates as specified in relevant acts. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted disallowance of Rs.97.25 Lacs which represent Employers’ contribution since the same was deposited before due dates as specified u/s 139(1). However, the disallowance of Employee’s Contribution was confirmed by following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. (143 Taxmann.com 178). The Ld. CIT(A) also held that this adjustment could be made u/s 143(1) in terms of decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of AA520 Veerappampalayam PACS Ltd. (138 Taxann.com 571). Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
Since the impugned order follows binding judicial precedents and the same is also in consonance with the view of Chennai Tribunal in M/s Shree Gokulam Chit & Finance Co. Pvt. Ltd. (MA Nos. 97/Chny/2023 & ors. dated 31.07.2023), the same do not require any interference on our part. 4. The appeal stand dismissed. Order pronounced on 6th May, 2024 (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) "ाियक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे4ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 06-05-2024 DS आदेशकीAितिलिपअ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant 2. " थ"/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु=/CIT 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडBफाईल/GF
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- Alsisar Hotels & Resorts Private Limited… vs Assistant Commisioner of Income Tax, JaipurJaipur26 May 2023Dismissed
Also relies on Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
The Tribunal held that the disallowance of PF and ESI payments made after the due date under the respective Acts, even if paid before the return filing due date, is correct. The ratio of the Supreme Court decision in Che...
- Sri Lakshmi Road Transport Company… vs DCIT., Circle-6(1), HyderabadHyderabad26 Nov 2025Dismissed
Also relies on Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
The Tribunal held that employees' contribution to PF and ESI deposited after the statutory due dates is not allowable under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. This decision followed the binding judgment of the jurisdictional ...
- Keshava Jute Mills Private Limited, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 1(1), KolkataKolkata3 Jul 2025Dismissed
Also relies on Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
The tribunal ruled that a subsequent Supreme Court judgment, when clear and directly on point, constitutes a "mistake apparent from the record" for rectification under Section 154, provided it is within the statutory tim...
- M/S Daulataram Engineering Services P.Ltd… vs The ADIT/CPC, BangaloreIndore8 May 2025Dismissed
Also relies on Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
The Tribunal upheld the disallowances, following the Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal also held that the disallowances were validly made under Section 143(1) and dismissed the challen...
- Telecrats India Private Limited, Jaipur vs ITO Ward 1(1), JaipurJaipur3 Jun 2024Dismissed
Also relies on Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
The Tribunal held that the disallowance of employee's contribution to PF/ESI, when not deposited by the due date prescribed under the relevant Act, is not allowable under Section 36(1)(va). This decision is based on the ...
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sahoo Supply Agency,Balasore vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New DelhiOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Gopal Aromatic PVT. LTD., Cuttack vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Crs Builders Private Limited vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 2 Nov 2026