DEEPAK POPTANI,AGRA V. J.A.O CIRCLE 1(1)(1), AGRA

ITA 42/AGR/2022

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Deepak Poptani against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), which confirmed the disallowance of a PF contribution claimed by the assessee. The Tribunal had previously dismissed the appeal but later recalled it to address the specific issue of the employer's contribution towards PF, which was part of the total amount claimed. The Tribunal found that there was a need to verify the details of the employer's contribution and its timely payment, leading to the restoration of the matter to the Assessing Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 789452 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 25-05-2022
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services P. Ltd. v. CIT
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASSESSEE; LD.; SHAILENDRA SRIVASTAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: NAVEEN GARGH
• Section: 43B

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 42/Agr/2022 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Deepak Poptani, 10, Kailash Vihar, Bye Pass Road, Agra. Vs. Assessing Officer, Circle 1(1)(1), Agra. PAN : AAXPP0723C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Naveen Gargh, Advocate Department by Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of hearing 15.10.2025 Date of pronouncement 26.11.2025 ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal was originally preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 30.03.2022 passed in Appeal No. CIT (A), Agra- 1/10138/2020-21 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2019-20, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed assessee’s first appeal, resulting in confirmation of the order dated 10.04.2020 passed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. The second appeal of the assessee was also dismissed by this Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.42/Agr/2022 2 | P a g e Tribunal vide order dated 14.02.2024. However, this Tribunal, vide order dated 27.08.2025 passed in assessee’s miscellaneous application No. 03/Agr/2024 moved u/s. 254(2) of the Act, partly recalled the order passed on 14.02.2024 to the extent of hearing on ground No. 1 relating to disallowance of PF contribution of Rs.58,720/- said to have been made towards employer’s contribution. 2. We heard learned representative for assessee and ld. Sr. DR for revenue on the aforesaid limited issue. 3. We noticed at the time of passing order dated 27.08.2025 on assessee’s miscellaneous application No. 03/Agr/2024 that, while adjudicating ground No. 1, the Tribunal seems to have lost sight of bifurcation provided by assessee in his written submissions dated 09.02.2024 and treated the entire amount of Rs.1,30,583/- as employees’ contribution liable for disallowance as per order dated 12.10.2022 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. v. CIT. Learned AR has drawn attention of the Bench that total amount of Rs.1,30,583/- was shown by the assessee’s Chartered Accountant in the audit report filed in Form No. 3CD. The entire amount was also timely deposited on 18.07.2018 before the due date of filing return in view of section 36(1)(iv) read with section 43B of the Act. However, this amount was inclusive of employer’s contribution towards Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.42/Agr/2022 3 | P a g e PF to the extent of Rs.55,275/- + administrative charges of Rs.2995/- to a total of Rs.58,720/-. Hence, the same may be allowed for deduction. 4. Learned Sr. DR for revenue has submitted that the Tribunal has passed the decision based on Hon’ble Apex Court order passed in Checkmate Services P. Ltd. (supra), as the assessee has shown entire amount as employees contribution towards PF and supported the impugned order. 5. Though, we do not find the revised grounds to this effect on record, yet keeping in view that the technicalities may not come in the way for doing substantial justice. The submissions of the assessee in respect of an amount of Rs.58,720/- made towards the employer’s contribution still needs to be verified at the end of ld. Assessing Officer. Hence, we restore this matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for a limited purpose of examining as to whether the entire amount shown in the audit report in form 3CD of Rs.1,30,583/- is inclusive of employer’s contribution of Rs.58,720/- and if the same is found to have been paid before the due date of filing return, the credit may be given to the assessee. The appeal is thus liable to be partly allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.42/Agr/2022 4 | P a g e 6. In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 26.11.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 26.11.2025 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra Printed from counselvise.com "