CORONA STEEL INDUSTRY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(3), KOLKATA

ITA 2531/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Corona Steel Industry Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata, which confirmed additions and adjustments made by the Central Processing Centre (CPC), Bengaluru. The primary issues were the addition of Rs.3,04,518 as bonus under Section 36(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, and an addition of Rs.13,566 for delayed deposit of ESI and PF contributions. The assessee argued that the CPC and CIT(A) did not consider their submissions and rectification application under Section 154 of the Act, which claimed that the provisions of Section 36(1)(ii) were not applicable and that the delay in depositing ESI & PF had already been accounted for in their return.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711896 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUSANTA SAHA
• Assessee Lawyers: ARVIND AGRAWAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘एसएमसी’ न्यायपीठ,कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.2531/KOL/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2021-2022) Corona Steel Industry Pvt. Ltd. P-34, Radhabazar, India Exchange Place, GP, Kolkata Vs DCIT, Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata PAN No. :AAECS 0449 L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Arvind Agrawal, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri susanta Saha, Addl. CIT-Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 05/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 22/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata, dated 18.11.2024 passed for Assessment Year 2021-2022. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the ground against the order of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition/adjustment made by the CPC of Rs.3,04,518/- u/s.36(1)(ii) of the Act and the addition of Rs.13,566/- made on account of delay in depositing ESI and PF. 3. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed its return of income declaring total income at Rs.Nil. The assessee has paid Rs.3,04,51/- to its employees as bonus, however, the CPC has made the addition of the above amount on the ground that the assessee could not provide tax audit report. Further in the computation of income, the assessee has itself already made a disallowance of Rs.13,566/- on account of delay in depositing of employees contribution of ESI and Provident Fund, however, the CPC, Bengaluru has Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2531/KOL/2024 2 made the adjustment of the same. In appeal, the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the view taken by the CPC. Now, the assessee is in further appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the return of income, there was a mistake apparent from record and in this regard, the assessee filed a rectification application u/s.154 of the Act stating that in the given facts and circumstances and as per the audited accounts and tax audit report, the provision of Section 36(1)(ii) of the Act was not applicable and that the delay in depositing of ESI & PF was added back in the computation of Income. However, the CPC passed an intimation u/s.143(1) r.w.s.154 of the Act without rectifying the mistake as pointed out by the assessee, made the adjustment/addition on both the accounts. It was also submitted by the ld. Counsel that during the appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted the details but the ld. CIT(A) without considering the same, confirmed the addition/adjustment made by the CPC. Therefore, the ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee may be given one more opportunity to file all the relevant documents before the ld. CIT(A) in regard to its claim. 5. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR supported the order of the ld.CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee was unable to substantiate before the ld. CIT(A) with providing relevant documentary evidence. Thus, the ld. Sr.DR prayed that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) should be upheld. 6. After hearing the submissions of the parties and perusing the material available on record, I find that the assessee could not furnish the tax audit report or any detailed submission against the ground that the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2531/KOL/2024 3 amount of Rs.3,04,518/- paid to its employees as bonus does not fall under the provisions of Section 36(1)(ii) of the Act. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and as the assessee failed to submit any documentary evidence in regard to its claim before the ld. CIT(A), I am of the view that it is a fit case to remit the matter back on this issue to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudication the issue afresh. Accordingly, the matter is remitted back on this issue to the file of ld. CIT(A) with a direction to dispose off the above issue of the assessee on merits after providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), failing which the ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on record. Thus, this ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. With regard to the other ground in respect of adjustment made by the CPC on account of alleged delay in depositing ESI and PF, the ld. CIT(A) has already set aside the issue to the file of ld. AO for verification. If the assessee’s claim is found to be correct then the adjustment made by the CPC in this regard shall stand deleted. Therefore, I have no hesitation to uphold the view taken by the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. Accordingly, this ground of assessee raised before the Tribunal stands dismissed. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2531/KOL/2024 4 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 22/07/2025. Sd/- (DUVVURU RL REDDY) उपाध्यक्ष / VICE PRESIDENT दिनाांक Dated 22/07/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कोलकाता /ITAT, Kolkata 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रतत //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "