THE DESIGNERS ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4, JALANDHAR
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM:
The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi, dated 10.08.2023 in respect of Assessment Year: 2018-19 challenging
therein adjustment by CPC u/s 143(1) in respect of payment towards
2 ITA No. 254/Asr/2023 The Designers v. Dy. CIT Employees’ Provident Fund and Labour Welfare Fund claimed u/s 37 of the
Act being expenditure.
At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee humbly submitted that
in the present case, the employer had deposited the Provident fund
contribution for the month of January, 2018 of Rs. 99,167/- on 15.02.2018,
i.e., within due date as stipulated in Provident Fund Act. In support, he has
filed a copy of payment acknowledgment issued by Employee’s Provident
Fund Organization and Bank online transaction receipt is attached as
Annexure 1 and Annexure 2. He accordingly, pleaded that there was no
delay in deposit of PF amount for the month of January, 2018 and the
auditor has inadvertently mentioned date of deposit as 16.02.2018 as the
date of payment. The relevant page extract of Tax Audit Report was
attached as Annexure 3 (APB pg. no. 3-4). Thus, he pleaded that the
adjustment of Rs. 99,167/- by way of adjustment made by the CPC may be
permitted to be corrected on examination and verification of the document,
by the Assessing Officer.
The ld. DR has no objection to the request of the appellant.
Heard both the sides, perused the record and the impugned order. It
is noted that in the present case, the employer has deposited the Provident
3 ITA No. 254/Asr/2023 The Designers v. Dy. CIT fund contribution of Rs.99,167/- within due date, i.e., February 15, 2018 as
per Annexure 1 and 2 as above. In view of that matter, we consider it deem
fit to remand back the matter to the file of the AO to examine the veracity of
documents in respect of payment of contribution of Provident fund being
claimed within due date by the appellant. The AO is directed to grant
adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and allow credit of the
said expenditure so claimed, if he finds it as per law.
The second issue regarding disallowance of Rs.3,930/- on account of
late payment of employees’ Labour Welfare Fund has been conceded by
the appellant counsel in view of the Hon’ble Apex Court judgment in the
case of Checkmet Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (SC). Thus, the second issue is
dismissed as not maintainable.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for
statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 31.10.2023
Sd/- Sd/- (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to:
4 ITA No. 254/Asr/2023 The Designers v. Dy. CIT (1)The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By Order
