AMENITY APPLIANCES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA V. ITO, WARD 10(2), , KOLKATA

ITA 668/KOL/2024

AI Insights

Amenity Appliances Pvt. Ltd. appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), which confirmed the additions made by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralized Processing Cell (CPC), Bangalore. The additions pertained to the delayed payment of employer and employee contributions to the Employees' Provident Fund (EPF) and Employees' State Insurance (ESI) under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal dismissed the first two sub-grounds of the appeal, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, which supported the lower authorities' decisions. However, regarding the third sub-ground, the Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument that the contributions were made within the stipulated time, as evidenced by the documents provided in the paper book. Consequently, the Tribunal restored this issue to the AO for a detailed examination of the new evidence.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474016 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUBHRO DAS
• Assessee Lawyers: VIDHI LADIA; CONFIRMING
• Section: 143(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM ITA No. 668/KOL/2024 (Assessment Year:2018-19) Amenity Appliances Pvt. Ltd. 181, Dumdum road, Kolkata-700074 West Bengal Vs. ITO, Ward 10(2) Aaykar Bhavan P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAICA4412D Assessee by : Shri Vidhi Ladia, AR Revenue by : Shri Subhro Das, DR Date of hearing: 12.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 28.02.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), ADDL/ JCIT(A)-7, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 02.02.2024 for the AY 2018-19. 02. At the time of hearing, the counsel of the assessee pressed only ground no.2 which has got three sub grounds. 03. The issue raised in ground no.2(a) and 2(b) is against the confirmation of addition as made by the DCIT CPC, Bangalore in relation to delayed payment of employer as well as employees contribution to EFP and ESI u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act and the issue raised in ground no.2(c) is without a prejudice ground that the Page | 2 ITA No. 668/KOL/2024 Amenity Appliances Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2018-19 Provisions of Section 36(1)(va) of the Act read with section 2(24) of the Act do not apply to the employers contribution to PF and ESI. 04. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 12.10.2018, declaring total income of ₹83,88,800/-, which was duly processed by the ld. AO, CPC, assessing the income at ₹104,02,870/- as against the returned income of ₹93,88,800/- by making two disallowances; (i) in respect of EPF/ ESI Rs.10,14,070/- (ii) ₹5,39,102/-, which was deposited well within the time. However, due to wrong reporting by the tax auditor in TAR (Tax Audit Report), the same was disallowed and added to the income of the assessee in the order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act. 05. The ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by confirming both these additions. 06. So far as the first issue as raised in ground no.2(a) and 2(b) is concerned, we are of the view that the same is squarely covered against the assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2022) 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC) dated 12.10.2022, and therefore, we do not find any merit in the same and accordingly, the ground nos.2(a) and 2(b), are dismissed. 07. So far as the ground no.2(c) is concerned, we note that the ld. AO CPC has added ₹5,39,102/- on the basis of wrong reporting in the TAR at page no.17. We also observe from the auditor’s certificate, a copy of which is available at page no.29 to 30 of the paper book, wherein the comprehensive details have been given as to the total amount of outstanding on account of Provident Fund and ESI, along with the due date of payment and actual dates of payment and we find that the amounts have been paid well within the time. The copies of the challans are also available in the paper book from page no.33 Page | 3 ITA No. 668/KOL/2024 Amenity Appliances Pvt. Ltd.; A.Y. 2018-19 onwards. Therefore, in our opinion, the disallowance made by the ld. AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT (A) of ₹5,39,102, is not correct and required to be deleted. However, as these evidences were not furnished before the authorities below, therefore in the interest of justice and fair play, we restore this issue to the file of the ld. AO for examination of these evidences and if found correct, needless to say that this disallowance has to be deleted. With this observation, we restore the appeal to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to decide the same on the basis of evidences filed by the assessee after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 08. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28.02.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 28.02.2025 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata "