TRIO SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2664/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 October 2025AY 2020-21Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Manish Agarwal (Accountant Member)2 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the issue of disallowing contributions not deposited within the due date for filing the return was settled law. They found merit in the Revenue's contentions that such disallowance can be processed under section 143(1) of the Act.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2020-21 arose against an order disallowing their ESI/PF claim of Rs.3,44,25,500/-. The disallowance was made under section 143(1) processing and upheld in lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance of ESI/PF contributions not deposited within the due date for filing the return is a valid subject for processing u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 139(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

Hearing: 15.10.2025Pronounced: 15.10.2025

Asstt. Year: 2020-21 Trio Security and Intelligence Pvt. Ltd. Vs Income Tax Officer, I-36, Lajpat Nagar-I, Ward-25(3), New Delhi-110024 New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACT5352R Assessee by : None (Adjournment Application Rejected) Revenue by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 15.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 15.10.2025 ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2020-21, arises against the Addl./JCIT(A), Ranchi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1075353788(1) dated 31.03.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

3.

It next emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that both the learned lower authorities have disallowed the assessee’s ESI/PF claim of Rs.3,44,25,500/- in section 143(1) processing dated 24.12.2021 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

4.

That being the case, the learned departmental representative vehemently argues in light of Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-I (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) that the issues is no more res integra since their lordships have settled the law in department’s favour and against the assessee that the above contributions ought to be deposited within the due date in the statute then that of filing section 139(1) return. He further quotes Woodland (Aero Club) Private Limited Vs. ACIT (2025) 178 taxmann.com 207 (Del.) that hon’ble jurisdictional high court has also held that such a disallowance could indeed form subject matter of processing u/s 143(1) of the Act. We find merit in the Revenue’s both the foregoing contentions to uphold the impugned disallowance in the assessee’s hands in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →