ADITYA SHANKAR CHOUDHARI,NASHIK V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE

ITA 333/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Aditya Shankar Choudhari, the appellant, contesting the disallowance of Rs. 8,22,528 added to his income by the Income Tax Department. This amount represented employees' contributions to Provident Fund and ESI, which were allegedly not deposited by the due dates prescribed under the relevant laws. The appellant argued that the contributions were made within the financial year and before the due date of filing the return of income, and thus should be allowed as deductions. However, the Tribunal, referencing a Supreme Court judgment, ruled against the appellant, affirming the addition to income.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 469581 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. Vs CIT(1)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ TRIPATHI
• Keywords: TDS; FORM 26AS
• Section: 154; 143(1); 43B; 37(1)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \"एस एम सी\" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"SMC\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.333/PUN/2025 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-2021 Aditya Shankar Choudhari, House No. 125/2, Hill Range, Phase 4, Deolali Camp-422401 Maharashtra PAN-AFOPC0286M Vs ITO Ward 10(1), Akurdi, Pune Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Manoj Tripathi Date of hearing : 20.03.2025 Date of pronouncement : .03.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)/JCIT(A) dated 08.02.2024 u/s 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 which is arising out of Assessment Order passed u/s.143(1) of the Act dated 16.12.2021. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- \"1. The CPC ought not to have made the addition of Rs. 8,22,528/-, being employees contribution to Provident fund of Rs. 8,21.996/- and to ESI of Rs. 532/- under section 35(1)(va) of the Income tax Act, 1961 and ignoring the fact that of the Act. u/s 43B of the Act 2. The CPC ought not to have made the addition of Rs 1,103/-, being any sum payable by way of contribution to any provident fund or superannuation fund or gratuity fund or any other fund for the welfare of employees, which is already dis allowed and considered as income. 3. The CPC erred in making adjustment with regard to the employees contribution u/s 36(1)(va) in the intimation u/s 143(1) when the same is a debatable issue. 4. The CPC ought to have appreciated the fact that the entire amount of Rs. 8,22,528/-, was paid within the financial year or before the due date of fling the retum of income. Hence, the same should be allowed as a deduction. 2 ITA No.333/PUN/2025 5. The CPC erred in not treating the expenditure as allowable u/s 37(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961, as the payment of Employees and employers contribution to PF and ESI was incurred in the course of business and for the purposes of business 6. CPC without application of mind ignoring the fact that payments have been made within the financial year or within the due date of fling the return and settled legal position, ought not to have made adjustment to the returned income. 7. Your appellant submits that the income from FD with Central Bank of India was offered to tax in the revised retum of income, however had entered wrong TAN number inadvertently for claiming TDS credit of Rs. 68,941/-, request you to grant the credit of TDS as per form 26AS 8. For this and any other ground of appeal that may be taken up during the course of hearing, your appellant requests that the addition of Rs. 8,22,528/- may be deleted and the retumed income may be accepted.\" 3. When the case was called for none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Perusal of the grounds indicate the only issue relates to disallowance made u/s 36(1)(v)(a) r.w.s. 2(24) of the Act at Rs. 8,22,528/- on account of delay in deposit of employees contribution to Provident Fund and ESI. 4. Ld. DR at the outset submitted that the issue stands squarely covered against assessee by the judgement of Honourable Supreme Court of India in the case of Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. Vs CIT(1), Civil appeal No. 2833 of 2016 dated 12.10.2022. 5. We have heard Ld. DR and perused the record placed before us. After going through the submissions of the assessee before Ld. CIT(A) and the statement of facts and grounds of appeal as well as the annexure to audit report on Form 3CD, it remains undisputed fact that the sum of Rs. 8,22,528/- received by the assessee from employees towards their contribution to Provident Fund and ESI on various dates during the Financial Year 2019-2020 have been deposited after the due date of payment prescribed under the relevant Act governing Provident Fund and ESI. Under the given facts and circumstances the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services Private Limited, (Supra) is squarely applicable against the assessee as Hon'ble court has held that in case of delay in depositing the employees contribution given 3 ITA No.333/PUN/2025 towards Provident Fund and ESI after the prescribed due date then such contribution deserves to be disallowed u/s 36(1)(V)(a) of the Act and is to be treated as income u/s 2(24)(x) of the Act. 6. We therefore fail to file any inconsistency in the finding of Ld. CIT(A). Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed. 7. In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on this day of March, 2025. (SS VISWANETHRA RAVI) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/ Pune; दििांक / Dated: March, 2025. Neeta आिेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. धवभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"SMC\" बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, \"SMC\" Bench, Pune. 5. गार्ा फाइल / Guard File. आिेशािुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune 4 ITA No.333/PUN/2025 "