HLE ENGINEERS PVT LTD,SURAT V. THE ACIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE, NAVSARI

ITA 954/SRT/2025

AI Insights

HLE Engineers Pvt. Ltd. appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad-12, which had confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The additions pertained to the disallowance of employees' contribution to the Provident Fund amounting to Rs. 5,43,881 and interest on late payment of TDS amounting to Rs. 11,907. The Tribunal examined the payments and found that they were made within the due dates, thus reversing the earlier decisions and allowing the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 831769 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 08-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; TDS
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 954/SRT/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) HLE Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Sy. No. 60-1, G.F. 1 & 2, Near Shukan Bungalow, Opp. Maheshwari Bhavan, City Light Road, Surat-395007 [PAN : AAACH 5979 G] Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Navsari Circle, Navsari (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant represented by : Shri Shaunak K. Zaveri, CA Respondent represented by: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr DR Date of Hearing 21.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 23.01.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 11.07.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad-12 (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “1.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad [here-in-after referred to as Ld. CIT(Appeals)] was not justified and grossly erred in dismissing the appeal which is bad-in-law and against principal of natural justice equity, thereby confirming the action of the A.O. for the order passed u/s. 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 which is incomplete and also bad on facts. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 954/SRT/2025 HLE Engineers Pvt. Ltd Vs. ACIT Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2– 2.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) was not justified and grossly erred and indirectly confirming the action of the A.O. in by accepting the addition on account of Employees Contribution to Provident Fund Rs. 5,43,881/- delay typographically error which is incorrect and amp; bad-in- law and needs to be deleted in the interest of natural justice and equity. 3.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) was not justified and grossly erred and indirectly confirming the action of the A.O. in not justified and erred in confirming the addition on account of Interest on Late Payment of TDS of Rs. 11,907/-.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing of Chemicals, Engineering Goods, Fertilizers, Plants etc. The assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 declaring Nil income. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed under Section 143(3) on 30.12.2019. During assessment, the Assessing Officer disallowed employees’ contribution to Provident Fund of Rs. 5,43,881/- and interest on late payment of TDS of Rs. 11,907/-. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed these additions. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. In this case, the amount on account of PF has been disallowed owing to a typographical error showing that the amount has been paid on 20.08.2016, whereas the actual payment has been made on 12.08.2016. On going through the bank accounts, we find that since the amounts have been paid within the due time prescribed under the Act, no disallowance is called for. The disallowance was necessitated by the Revenue owing to incorrect data mentioned by the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 954/SRT/2025 HLE Engineers Pvt. Ltd Vs. ACIT Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 3– Since the facts have been reconciled and it is proved that the payment having been made within the statutory due date prescribed under the relevant Act, we hold that no disallowance is called for in this case. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. This order is pronounced in the open Court on 23.01.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Surat; Dated 23/01/2026 btk आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध , अिधकरण अपीलीय आयकर , /DR,ITAT, Surat, 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ITAT, Surat 1. Date of dictation …dictated in the open court on..…21.01.2026….….. 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member … …22.01.2026………… 3. Other Member…….22.01.2026…………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S …. …22.01.2026…………. 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement ....... 23..01.2026........ 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S ……23.01.2026…..…………. 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk ……23.01.2026.….…. 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… Printed from counselvise.com "