DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1), NEW DELHI V. HOLISOL LOGISTICS P.LTD, NEW DELHI

MA 72/DEL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Revenue's Miscellaneous Application seeking to recall an order that upheld the deletion of an addition under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act concerning employee contributions. The Revenue argued that a subsequent Supreme Court decision in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, which mandated that employees' contributions should be deposited before the statutory due date, necessitated a review of the Tribunal's earlier decision. The assessee's counsel contended that the Supreme Court's judgment was not available at the time of the Tribunal's original decision, and thus, there was no error in the record to rectify. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee, dismissing the Revenue's application as frivolous.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 835789 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. CIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B.S. ANAND

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : C: NEW DELHI BEFORE Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Miscellaneous Application No.72/Del/2023 (ITA No.4361/Del/2018) Assessment Year : 2014-15 DCIT, Circle 11(1), New Delhi. Vs. Holisol Logistics Pvt. Ltd., A-1, Cariappa Marg, Sainik Farms, New Delhi. PAN: AACCH2364P (Applicant) (Respondent) Applicant by : Ms Reema Grewal, CA Department by : Shri B.S. Anand, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 30.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 13.02.2026 ORDER PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The Revenue has filed the instant Miscellaneous Application seeking recalling of the order dated 30.08.2022 whereby and whereunder the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) deleting the addition u/s 36(1)(va) has been upheld. 2. It is the case of the Revenue that since the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.2833 of 2016 in the matter of Checkmate Services P. Ltd. vs. CIT, 143 Taxmann.com 178 held that the employees contribution shall be deposited before the statutory due date, the order passed by the coordinate Bench is Printed from counselvise.com MA No.72/Del/2023 2 required to be rectified. The assessee’s counsel Ms Reema Grewal, on the other hand, vehemently supported the order passed by the Tribunal in upholding the order dated 28.03.2018 passed by the Ld.CIT(A) deleting the addition made u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act on the ground that the judgement passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. (supra) had not seen the light of the day when the order was passed by the coordinate Bench rejecting the appeal filed by the Revenue and, therefore, there is no error apparent on the face of the record which is required to be rectified. 3. Having regard to the entire gamut of the matter the submission made by the ld. counsel for the assessee is found to be acceptable. Considering that the date of judgement passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is 12.10.2022, the order passed by the coordinate Bench on 30.08.2022 is found to be just and proper. There is no mistake apparent on the face of the record and, therefore, rectification of the said order does not and cannot arise at all. 4. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Revenue is found to be frivolous and, thus, dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 13.02.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 13th February, 2026. dk Printed from counselvise.com MA No.72/Del/2023 3 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "