ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU V. SHREE PS HR CONSULTANTS P LTD, NASHIK

MA 108/PUN/2023

AI Insights

The case revolves around a miscellaneous application filed by the Revenue seeking to rectify the Tribunal's earlier decision that had favored the assessee regarding the timing of deposits for PF & ESI dues. Initially, the Tribunal had allowed the assessee's appeal, permitting deductions for the employees' share of EPF and ESI deposited before the due date of filing the return under section 139(1) of the Act. However, following the Supreme Court's ruling in Checkmate Services P. Ltd., which overturned previous favorable judgments, the Tribunal recognized the need to rectify its earlier order to comply with the Supreme Court's binding decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471130 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 08-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Next Hearing Date: 06-09-2024
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 27-04-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. vs. CIT & Ors., CIT vs. Nipso polyfabriks Ltd.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AKHILESH SRIVASTAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: SANKET JOSHI; VIRTUE OF

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE : BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GD PADMAHSHALI, , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.No.108/PUN./2023 Arising out of I.T.A.No.618/PUN./2021 - Assessment Year 2019-2020 The Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangaluru. vs. Shree PS HR Consultants Pvt. Ltd., 10, Vishwa, Utkarsha Co-op Society, Bhabha Nagar, Mumbai Naka PIN – 422 011. Maharashtra. PAN AATCS6265K (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Shri Akhilesh Srivastava For Assessee : Shri Sanket Joshi Date of Hearing : 06.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 08.10.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This Revenue’s miscellaneous application M.A.No.108/PUN./2023 filed u/s.254(2) of the of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short \"the Act\"), seeks to recall/rectify our order dated 10.10.2022 allowing assessee’s main appeal ITA.No.618/PUN./2021 for assessment year 2019-2020. 2. Coming to the Revenue’s sole substantive grievance pleaded in the instant miscellaneous application that the tribunal has committed an apparent mistake in deleting the impugned disallowance(s) thereby holding that the corresponding PF & ESI dues had been deposited before the 2 MA.No.108/PUN./2023 due date of filing return u/sec.139(1) of the Act than under the corresponding statute. We note that the same issue is no more res integra in light of hon’ble apex court’s recent landmark decision in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. vs. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC) has settled the law against the taxpayer. That being the case, we treat our impugned order has an apparent mistake u/sec.254(2) of the Act and recall our order dated 10.10.2022 in very terms. 3. Coupled with this tribunal’s recent order in M.A.No.50/PUN./2023 in ITA.No.405/Pun./2021 dated 04.08.2023 DCIT vs. Shankar Morappa & Co. Pune has already accepted the Revenue’s very contentions as under : “2. The facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (AO) made disallowance of Rs.10,54,797/- in the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act on the ground that the assessee deposited the Employees’ share of EPF and ESI etc. belatedly. The Tribunal in its order u/s.254(1) observed that the Employees’ share was deposited prior to the due date of filing return u/s.139(1) and hence deduction was allowable under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. In reaching this conclusion, the Tribunal relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in CIT Vs. Nipso polyfabriks Ltd. (2013) 350 ITR 327 (HP). 3 MA.No.108/PUN./2023 3. The Revenue has moved the instant Miscellaneous Application urging that the view taken by the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in Nipso polyfabriks Ltd. has since been overruled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. VS. CIT & Ors. (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC), holding that the deduction of the Employees’ share can be allowed u/s.36(1)(va) only if it is deposited before the time limit under the respective statutes and not by the due date u/s.139(1) of the Act. It was, thus, urged by the ld. DR that the order earlier passed by the Tribunal granting the deduction, required rectification. No serious objection was taken by the ld. AR to the grievance of the Revenue. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. There is no dispute on the fact the law prevalent at that time of passing the order u/s.254(1) was in favour of the assessee by virtue of certain judgments, including Nipso polyfabriks Ltd., granting deduction u/s.36(1)(va) of the employees’ share of EPF etc. even if the deposit was made after the due date under respective Acts but before the time limit provided for filing the return u/s.139(1) of the Act. Such favourable view has since been reversed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd.(SC). In view of the latest judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, 4 MA.No.108/PUN./2023 which is binding under Article 141 of the Constitution, the benefit of deduction allowed by the Tribunal in its order u/s 254(1), requires rectification. Making necessary rectification, we hold that the disallowance made by the AO has to be sustained. It is ordered accordingly. 5. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application is allowed.” 4. We thus allow the Revenue’s instant M.A.No.108/PUN./2023 in same terms. Since the miscellaneous application of the Revenue is allowed by respectfully following the decision of hon’ble apex court’s recent landmark decision in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. (supra), consequently, the appeal I.T.A.No.618/PUN./2021 filed by the assessee which was allowed by this tribunal vide order dated 10.10.2022 earlier, is now dismissed. A copy of this order be placed in the respective appeal file of the assessee. Ordered accordingly. Order pronounced in the open Court on 08.10.2024. Sd/- Sd/- [GD PADMAHSHALI] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 08th October, 2024 VBP/- 5 MA.No.108/PUN./2023 Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The Pr. CIT, Pune concerned. 4. D.R. ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune. "