INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MANDI GOBINDGARH, HQ SIRHIND vs. NEW FATEHGARH SAHIB SIRHIND BUS TRANSPORT PVT. LTD., SIRHIND

PDF · subscribers
ITA 469/CHANDI/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 July 2024AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member), SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)8 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Revenue's appeal was not maintainable due to a low tax effect (Rs. 63,769/-) which was below the prescribed threshold, and the case did not fall under any exceptions listed in the CBDT circulars. The delay in filing the appeal was also not condoned.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting a disallowance of Rs. 2,06,374/- made under Section 36(1)(va) for delayed remittance of employee's ESI and EPF contributions. The disallowance was made by the CPC under Section 154.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable when the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limits, and whether a subsequent Supreme Court judgment can justify condoning the delay in filing such an appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va),Section 154,Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI,

For Respondent: Shri Dharam Vir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Hearing: 04.07.2024Pronounced: 05.07.2024
15.

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced on 05.07.2024.

More judgments on Section 36(1)(va)

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →