M/S LA OPALA RG LTD.,KOLKATA vs. WBG-C-(111)-1, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 141/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 April 2024AY 2021-22Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ), Dr. Manish Borad (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to verify the actual payments of employees' PF & ESI contributions for the relevant financial year. If payments were made within the due dates, the deduction should be allowed, and it should not have been claimed in a subsequent year.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerned the confirmation of an addition of Rs. 1,80,794 representing employees' contributions towards PF & ESI. The assessee contended that payments were made within the due dates, and an auditor's error led to the issue.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of employees' PF & ESI contributions was justified, and if payments were made within the statutory due dates for the relevant assessment year.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not explicitly mentioned in the provided text, but relates to disallowance of employee contributions not paid within due dates.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(KZ) & Dr. Manish Borad

Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. ADDL/JCIT(Appeals), Aurangabad dated 02.01.2024 passed for A.Y. 2021-22. 1

(A.Y. 2021-2022) M/s. La Opala RG Ltd.

2.

The solitary grievance of the assessee is that ld. ADDL/JCIT(A), Aurangabad has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,80,794/-, which represents employees’ contributions towards PF & ESI.

3.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the very outset, submitted that there is no delay in making the payments to the respective accounts of PF & ESI. The auditor in the audit report has erroneously mentioned the due date of F.Y. 2018-19 instead of F.Y. 2020-21.

4.

The ld. Sr. D.R., on the other hand, submitted that this ground was withdrawn by the assessee before the ld. 1st Appellate Authority and took us through the finding of ld. ADDL/JCIT(Appeals) in this regard. In order to rebut this submission of the ld. D.R., ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that on the first instance, it was not pressed on account of availability of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services (P) Limited –vs.- CIT reported in 143 taxmann.com 178. Later on, assessee cross verified the details and filed revised submission on 26th April, 2023, whose cognizance has not been taken. He also annexed Annexure A/1 exhibiting the details of contributions made by the employees and their payments. Such details are available in a tabular form duly certified by Chartered Accountant, namely Shri Navindra Kumar Surana.

(A.Y. 2021-2022) M/s. La Opala RG Ltd.

5.

On due consideration of the above, we are of the view that it requires verification at the end of the ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. Assessing Officer is directed to verify the actual payments of employees’ contributions towards PF & ESI during financial year relatable to A.Y. 2021-22 and if it is found that such payments were made within due date, then that deduction be allowed. He will further verify, that the deduction of this amount has not been claimed in any other subsequent year.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 04/04/2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →