STAR FACILITIES MANAGEMENT LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CRICLE-24(2), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1490/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 June 2023AY 2019-203 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 delay in depositing employee's contribution towards PF & ESI is squarely covered by the Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services P.Ltd. Therefore, the grounds raised by the assessee were dismissed.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction for employee's contribution towards PF & ESI. The CPC made an adjustment disallowing this claim due to delay in deposit. The assessee appealed this adjustment.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of employee's contribution towards PF & ESI due to delayed deposit is justified, and if the adjustment made by CPC under Section 143(1) was within its scope.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & DR. B.R.R.KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Satyajeet Goel, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr.DR
Hearing: 19.06.2023Pronounced: 23.06.2023

ORDER

PER KUL BHARAT, JM :

1.

The present appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2019-20 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A), National faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi dated 28.03.2023.

2.

The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

1(i). “That on the fact and circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC) was not justified in confirming the adjustment made by Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) vide intimation u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, dated 15-09-2020 to the extent of Rs. 13,94,196/- u/s 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of claim of employees contribution towards Provident fund (PF) & Employees State Insurance (ESI).

(ii) That the adjustment made vide intimation u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, dated 15-09-2020 being outside the scope and purview of section 143(1), the same is illegal and without jurisdiction. (iii) That the claim of deduction towards deposit of PF and ESI contribution in return of income being based on the decision of Jurisdictional High Court, the adjustment made in the intimation u/s 143(1) is wholly invalid and unwarranted in absence of any illegality in claim of deduction at the relevant point of time.

2. That in any case, the appellant having already deposited these contributions with the appropriate authorities before due date of filling of return, there is no case of any disallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act.

3. That the orders passed by lower authorities are not justified on facts and same are bad in law.

4. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or forgo any or all of the grounds as may be necessary and in the interest of justice.”

3.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee fairly conceded that the issue involved in this case is related to delay in payment of employee’s contribution towards PF & ESI.

4.

Having heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that since the issue involved in this case is related to delay in deposit of employee’s contribution towards PF & ESI by the assessee. The issue is squarely covered against the tax payer by the judgmenet of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services P.Ltd. vs CIT-A in Civil Appeal No.2833 of 2016 dated 12.10.2022. Therefore, respectfully following the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services P.Ltd. vs CIT-A (supra), grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed. Page | 2

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 23rd June, 2023.

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 →