JCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-19,NEW DELHI, DELHI vs. M/S JAQUAR AND COMPANY PVT LTD, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1713/DEL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 August 2023AY 2018-19Bench: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.KUL BHARAT (Judicial Member)3 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable due to the tax effect being less than Rs. 50 lakhs, as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting a disallowance made by CPC for late payment of PF and ESI. The disallowance was made under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal is maintainable based on the tax effect and whether the disallowance for late payment of PF/ESI under Section 143(1) was correctly deleted by the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

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, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & SH.KUL BHARAT

Hearing: 24/08/2023Pronounced: 24/08/2023

This appeal filed by the revenue is preferred against the order of CIT(A)-27, New Delhi dated 23.05.2022 for A.Y. 2018-19.

2.

The grievance of the revenue read as under :-

1) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law, by deleting the disallowance of Rs.41,40,340/- u/s 143(1) made by the CPC, Bangalore on account of late payment of PF and ESI.

2) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in providing relief amounting to Rs.41,40,340/- by erroneously stating that the CPC, Bangalore does not fall under the prima facie adjustment on account of late payment of PF and ESI by not correctly interpreting the provisions of Section 143(l)(a)(ii) of the I.T. Act, 1^61. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law by not considering the provisions of Section 143(l)(a)(ii), where, total income or loss shall be computed after making an adjustment if such incorrect claim is apparent from any information in the return.

4) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in not correctly interpreting the provisions of Section 36(l)(va) and Explanation to this clause which specifically provides for allowance of the employee’s contribution from the taxable income if such sum is credited to the employee’s account in the relevant funds(s) on or before the due date as per respective statute(s).

5) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in not relying on the ruling of jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Bharat Hotel Ltd. 410 ITR 417 (2019), in which this issue was decided in favour of the Revenue.

6) (a) The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts.

(b) The appellant craves to add, alter of amend any/all of the ground of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal.

3.

A perusal of the grievance of the revenue show that the tax effect would be less than Rs. 50 lakhs, therefore, this appeal is not maintainable as per CBDT Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019.

4.

This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed with liberty to the revenue to approach the Tribunal as per the provisions of law, should it feel that the tax effect is more than Rs. 50 lakhs.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.

6.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 24.08.2023 in the presence of both the rival representatives.

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 →