SPARROW SECURITY SERVICES,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), JAMMU

ITA 40/ASR/2023Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 April 2023AY 2018-1916 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the addition related to employee's contribution paid after the due date, amounting to Rs. 10,79,120/-, is upheld. However, the additions for employer's contribution (Rs. 28,91,068/-) and employee's contribution where cheques were presented before the due date but cleared later (Rs. 8,37,424.90) are to be quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee made late deposits of employer and employee contributions to PF and ESI. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 48,07,613/- for these late deposits. The CIT(A) upheld the addition.

What were the issues?

Whether late deposit of employee's contribution to PF/ESI is disallowable, and whether payments made by cheque before the due date but cleared later are considered timely.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(va),Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.

Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

Hearing: 12.04.2023Pronounced: 24.04.2023

Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee was filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi,[in brevity the ‘CIT (A)’] 2 Assessment Year: 2018-19

order passed u/s 250of the Income Tax Act 1961[in brevity the Act], for A.Y. 2018-19.The impugned order was emanated from the order of the NAC Delhi,

order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) & 143 (3B) of the Act date of order 19.01.2021. The assessee has taken the following grounds: - “1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal by passing order u/s 250(6) and sustaining the addition made by the AO.

2.

That the order passed u/s 250(6)

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

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 →