GROZ ENGINEERING TOOLS PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-10(2), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2868/DEL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 October 2023AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER A N D SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the challan dates indicated payments were made before the due dates. Therefore, the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for re-examination and adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerned the disallowance of Rs. 41,94,827/- for late deposit of employees' contribution to Provident Fund and ESI. The assessee contended that the payments were made before the due dates, and a wrong date format in the 3CD report caused the issue.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of employees' contribution to PF and ESI is justified when payments were made before the statutory due dates, despite a potential error in reporting.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, [ DELHI BENCH “B” : DELHI ]

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASADSHRI M. BALAGANESH

For Appellant: Ms. Akansha Birla, C. A.;, Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay

आदेश /O R D E R PER C. N. PRASAD, J. M. :

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to CIT (Appeals)]/National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC] Delhi, dated 14.11.2022 for the assessment year 2017-18.

2.

The only grievance of the assessee in its appeal is that the ld. CIT (Appeals) is not justified in confirming the disallowance of Rs.41,94,827/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of late deposit of employees contribution towards Provident Fund and ESI.

3.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that the disallowance was confirmed by the ld. CIT (Appeals) ignoring the submissions of the assessee that the payments were in fact made before the due date as specified in the respective Acts. However, there was a wrong statement in the 3 CD reports. The ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to page 3 of the synopsis submits that the date format mentioned in the 3 CD report is MM-DD-YYY. However, the actual date mentioned as per challans is DD-MM-YYY. Therefore, it is submitted that since the amount has been paid before the due date of the relevant Acts and there is no justification in making the disallowance. The ld. Counsel submits that the matter may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper examination and adjudication of the issue as the contributions to PF and ESI were all remitted before the due date specified under the respective Acts.

4.

The ld. DR has no serious objection in restoring the matter to the Assessing Officer.

5.

Heard both the sides and perused the details furnished before us. We observe that the actual date as per the challans show that the payments were in fact made before the due dates mentioned in the respective Acts i.e. PF and ESI. Thus in the interest of justice, we restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer who shall examine the contentions of the assessee with reference to the evidences and allow the claims of the assessee in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on : 31/10/2023.

More judgments on Section 43B

All 7,161 judgments and leading authorities on Section 43B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →