ASHOK KUMAR,GURGAON V. ITO WARD 1(3), GURGAON

ITA 1519/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Ashok Kumar, the appellant, contesting the decision of the CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, which dismissed his appeal regarding the disallowance of employees' contributions to PF and ESI for the assessment year 2018-19. The main contention was that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without discussing the grounds on merits and disregarded factual details and submissions made during the assessment proceedings. The tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services P. Ltd., upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that contributions to PF and ESI must be deposited by the statutory due dates, not merely by the due date of filing the return under section 139(1) of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 31419 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 03-04-2024
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax-I (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AN APPLICATION ADJOURNMENT BY
• Section: 139(1); 43B

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member ITA No. 1519/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Ashok Kumar Near Shiv FloorMill, Shiv Nagar, Patuadi Road, Gurgaon-122001 Vs Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Gurgaon, Haryana (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. BETPK7014L Assessee by : None Revenue by : An application for adjournment by Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 11.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 26.11.2024 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2018-19, arises against the CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”], Delhi dated 02.02.2024. 2. Case called twice. None appear at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 3. The assessee pleads the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal: “1 a. The CIT(A) has summarily dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee without discussing the grounds on merits which is unjustified, illegal and against the provisions of the Act. 2 b. The order passed is in complete disregard of the factual details and submissions filed by the appellant during the course of the assessment proceedings and ITA No. 1519/Del/2024 Ashok Kumar 2 appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 3 c. The CIT(A) have grossly erred affirming the disallowance employees contribution to PF Rs. 27,41,135, and ESI Rs. 15,65,131/- deposited beyond due date prescribed under relevant Acts but before due date of filing of return. The relevant clauses amended with effect from 1.4.2021, which is in prospective in operation. 4 d. Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the rational of allowance of employer's contribution even if made beyond due date of filing of return under section 43B as per amendment with effect from 01.04.2004. 5 e. Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in disallowing the employees contribution to EPF u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act in view of the fact that the same had been deposited before the due date of filing of return of income and therefore the same is liable to be deleted. There is no distinction between employees and employer contribution to PF, and if the total contribution is deposited on or before the due date of furnishing return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act, then no disallowance can be made towards employees' contribution to provident fund.” 4. Suffice to say, it is clear as per the assessee’s foregoing pleadings that hon’ble apex court’s recent landmark decision in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax-I (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) dated 12.10.2022 has already settled the issue of such ESI/PF that such dues have to be deposited as per due date(s) in the corresponding statute(s) than that of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act. We thus, find no merit in assessee’s sole substantive grievance in principle. We make it clear at the same time that the assessee shall indeed be at liberty to agitate the issue of “due” date compliance before the learned assessing authority in consequential computation as per law. Order accordingly. ITA No. 1519/Del/2024 Ashok Kumar 3 5. This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose in above terms. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 26/11/2024. Sd/- Sd/- (M. Balaganesh) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 26/11/2024 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR "