SMT SYSTEMS LLP,PUNE vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE -2, PUNE, PUNE
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :
This assessee’s appeal, for assessment year 2018-19,
arises against the Addl./JCIT(A)-3, Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad’s
Din and Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1062539367(1),
dated 13.03.2024, in proceedings u/s.143(1) of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
The assessee pleads the following substantive
grounds in the instant appeal :
“The following grounds are taken without prejudice to each
other- On facts and circumstances of the case and in law,
2 ITA.No.1247/PUN./2024
The learned AO erred in making addition of Rs.1,34,087/-
towards delay in deposit of Employees Contribution to
ESIC under section 36(1)(va) and the learned CIT Appeals
erred in confirming the same. 2. The learned AO has erred in making addition towards
delay in deposit of Employees Contribution to ESIC and in
treating the same as taxable business income of assessee
without considering assessee's submission and the
learned CIT Appeals has erred in confirming the same. 3. The addition has been made/confirmed without
considering the relevant applicable judgments of appellate
forum. 4. The intimation has made certain adjustments which are
not permissible under section 143(1) of the Act, therefore
intimation issued under section 143(1) is bad in law and
the adjustment is beyond jurisdiction of the Assessing
Officer. 5. There is error in computation of tax liability by CPC which
is prayed to be corrected. 6. The CIT (Appeals) has erred in dismissing assessee's
appeal by not condoning delay in filing of appeal. 7. The learned CIT Appeals erred in dismissing assessee's
appeal without affording it an adequate opportunity of
being heard and also erred in not considering merits of the
case.
3 ITA.No.1247/PUN./2024
The assessee prays before your honour to afford it and
allow an opportunity of being heard and on merits of the
case before the CIT Appeal. 9. The assessee hereby requests for allowing any other relief
as available under the law.
The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, vary and
or withdraw any or all above grounds of appeal.”
Learned counsel is fair enough at the outset that
hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in case of Checkmate
Services P. Ltd. & Ors. vs. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC)
has already settled the issue in department’s favour that it is
not the “due” date of filing sec.139(1) return, but that under
the corresponding statute, which forms the clinching criteria
for the purpose of credit of the corresponding ESI & PF dues in
the prescribed account. We appreciate this fair stand and
reject the assessee’s sole substantive grievance in very terms.
Ordered accordingly.
This assessee’s appeal is dismissed in above terms.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 27.09.2024.
Sd/- Sd/- [DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Pune, Dated 27th September, 2024
VBP/-
4 ITA.No.1247/PUN./2024
Copy to
The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The Pr. CIT, Pune concerned 4. D.R. ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File.
//By Order//
//True Copy //
Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.
