Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(2), New Delhi, I.P.Estate, New Delhi V. Coforge Limited, Kalkaji, South Delhi

ITA 125/DEL/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6471 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-06-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 15-05-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 14-01-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ALIK VASANT
• Section: 43B; 143(1)

Judgement Text

ITA No.- 125/Del/2024 Coforge limited . Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘B’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI GS PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No:- 125/Del/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4(2), New Delhi. I.P. Estate, New Delhi. Vs. Coforge Limited, 8, third floor. Balaji Estate, Guru Ravi Das Marg, Kalkaji, South Delhi. PAN No: AAACN0332P APPELLANT RESPONDENT Revenue by : Shri B.K. Singh, Sr. DR Assessee by : Shri Alik Vasant, FCA and Ms. Poonam Ahuja, Adv. Date of Hearing : 16.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 18 .06.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 16.11.2023 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), ADDL/JCIT (A) Madurai, [hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT(A)’/] in ITA No.- 125/Del/2024 Coforge limited . Page 2 of 4 Appeal No. CIT(A), Delhi-6/10065/2019-20 arising out of an appeal before it against the order dated 30.03.2019 passed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru, (hereinafter referred as the Ld. AO) for Assessment Year 2017-18. 3. Heard and perused the records. 4. The AO had made a disallowance on the basis of fact that in Tax audit report certain amounts were shown as not allowable u/s 40A(7) of the Act. Assessee has claimed that it was inadvertent mistake. Admittedly, from the evidences submitted and appreciated by CIT(A), it is clearly evident /that the appellant had paid Rs.4,47,94,159/- towards Gratuity and Rs.2,37,581/- towards leave encashment during the previous year relevant to Assessment year 2017-18. If the tax audit report contains a negative i.e. that certain expenses e.g. are of not allowable nature then the AO can use that as ‘material’ for the purpose of assessment under section 143(3) of the Act, and the burden of proving its not so is on the assessee. So that way opinion of auditor is not conclusive. Here AO has not given any such opportunity to assessee and CIT(A) has ITA No.- 125/Del/2024 Coforge limited . Page 3 of 4 drawn conclusion on evidences showing statutory deposits during the previous years. Thus, 43B disallowance was not warranted and is rightly deleted by CIT(A). The grounds of appeal have no substance. The appeal of Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 18.06.2024 Sd/- Sd/- (GS PANNU) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 18/06/2024. Pooja/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI ITA No.- 125/Del/2024 Coforge limited . Page 4 of 4 Date of dictation 10.6.24 Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating Member Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other Member Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order Date of dispatch of the Order