RAMESH BROS. ENGINEERING CORPORATION,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 30(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1745/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 October 2024AY 2019-2020Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of employee's contribution to PF paid after the due date. This decision was based on the Supreme Court's ruling in the Checkmate Services Private Limited case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against the disallowance of Rs. 14,77,078/- paid towards employees' Provident Fund. This disallowance was upheld by the CIT(A). The assessee did not appear for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether employee's contribution to Provident Fund paid after the due date is disallowable as an expenditure.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va),Section 2(24)(x)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ORDER / आदेश The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.06.2024 passed by the CITA-7, Delhi arising out of the intimation dated 06.03.2020 for Assessment Year 2019-20 under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the act’) whereby and whereunder the disallowance of expenditure in respect of payment made towards employees Provident fund amounting to Rs.14,77,078/-has been upheld.

Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ramesh Bros. Engineering Corporation 2. At the time of hearing of the matter none appeared on behalf of the assessee, neither any adjournment has been sought for. Hence, the matter has been decided ex parte.

3.

Upon perusal of the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), it appears that since the disputed amount of employees contribution to PF/ESIC were paid by the assessee beyond the due dates as prescribed under the relevant Acts, following the order dated 12.10.2022 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Private Limited –vs- Commissioner of Income Tax, in Civil Appeal No. 2833 of 2022, the said authority confirmed the order of disallowance made by the CPC under Section 36 (1)(va) r.w.s.2(24)(x) of the Act which is found to be justified, without any ambiguity so as not to warrant interference. Hence, the appeal preferred by the assessee is found to be devoid of any merit and thus, dismissed.

4.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 16th October, 2024

More judgments on Section 36(1)(va)

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →