DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI V. DABUR INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

MA 204/DEL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Revenue's request to recall an ITAT order that allowed deductions for employees' contributions to PF & ESIC paid after the due date but before the filing of the Income Tax Return, based on a precedent from the Delhi High Court. The Revenue's recall was prompted by a subsequent Supreme Court decision that contradicted this position. However, the ITAT found that the Supreme Court's decision came after the original ITAT order was issued, and thus, did not affect the validity of the earlier decision. The Tribunal referenced the Supreme Court's ruling in Mepco Industries Ltd. to assert that a subsequent decision cannot retroactively affect an earlier order unless a mistake is apparent from the record.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 125991 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 25-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. Aimil Limited, Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, Mepco Industries Ltd. vs. CIT & Ors.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH TRIPATHI
• Assessee Lawyers: M.P. RASTOGI; SHIVAM MALIK
• Section: 154; 254(2); 208

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “Friday-I”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NOS. 204 & 205/Del/2023 (IN ITA NOS. 7431 & 7253/DEL/2017) A.Yrs. 2010-11 & 2011-12 DCIT, CIRCLE 7(1), M/S DABUR INDIA LTD. ROOM NO. 416, 8/3, ASAF ALI ROAD, C.R. BUILDING, NEW DELHI -2 I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI-2 (PAN: AACD0474C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. M.P. Rastogi, Adv. & Sh. Shivam Malik, Adv. Department by : Sh. Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 25.04.2025 Date of pronouncement : 25.04.2025 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM By way of these Miscellaneous Applications, Revenue seeks recall of the order of this Tribunal passed in Revenue’s I.T.A. No. 7431/Del/2017 for AY 2010-11 and in Assessee’s ITA No. 7253/Del/2017 for AY 2011-12 decided vide common order dated 20.09.2022. In the said order, the ITAT had relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Aimil Limited (2010) 321 ITR 508 (Del.) and held that the amount paid towards employees contribution to the PF & ESIC after the due date mentioned u/s. 36(1)(va) before the due date of filing of Income Tax Return was allowable. Now, Revenue seeks recall of the aforesaid order of the Tribunal dated 20.09.2022 on the ground that 2 Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT in Civil Appeal No. 2833 of 2016 vide order dated 12.10.2022 has taken a contrary view. 2. Upon hearing both the counsels and perusing the records, we find that decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (Supra) came up on 12.10.2022. However, the Order of the Tribunal was passed on 20.09.2022, thus it was passed prior to the pronouncement of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (Supra). We further find that Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Mepco Industries Ltd. vs. CIT & Ors. (2009) 319 ITR 208 (SC) has held that subsequent decision cannot render a mistake in an order apparent from record, prior to the date of order of the Supreme Court. The relevant portion of the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mepco Industries Ltd. vs. CIT & Ors. read as under:- “….We may now deal with the judgment of Calcutta High Court in the case of Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Limited vs. Income Tax Officer, Calcutta & ors., reported in (1981) 130 ITR 710. In that case, the appellant-assessee derived profits from three industries, one of which qualified for special rebate under Part-I of Schedule-I to the Finance Act, 1965, for the Assessment Year 1966-67. In granting this special rebate, the Income Tax Officer computed the profits attributable to that industry without deducting development rebate granted to the appellant. The Income Tax Officer sought to rectify the mistake under section 154 of the Act by re-computing the profits by deducting the development rebate. The appellant filed a writ petition for setting aside the notice of rectification. It was held by the Calcutta High Court that since there was conflict of opinion on computation of profits of priority industry for granting tax relief which conflict was resolved by the Supreme Court later on for the subsequent Assessment Year 1967-68, such subsequent decision of the Supreme Court did not obliterate the conflict of opinion prior to it. It was held that, under Section 154 of the Act, rectification was not permissible on debatable issue……” 3 2.1 Keeping in view the aforesaid factual matrix and respectfully following the binding precedent of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Mepco Industries Ltd. (Supra), we are of the considered opinion that there is no mistake apparent in the order of the Tribunal dated 20.09.2022 and Revenue is seeking a review of the Tribunal’s order in the garb of rectification, which is not permissible u/s. 254(2) of the I.T. Act and, therefore, the both the Miscellaneous Applications, being devoid of any merit, are dismissed as such. 3. In the result, both the Misc. Applications filed by the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced on 25/04/2025 upon conclusion of hearing. Sd/- Sd/- [YOGESH KUMAR US] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SRBhatnagar Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT By Order, Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Benches "