BT Data and Surveying Services India Private Limited, New Delhi V. Circle-4(2), New Delhi

ITA 1658/DEL/2021

AI Insights

The case involves BT Data and Surveying Services India Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting an intimation from the Income Tax Officer (ITO) regarding the disallowance of employees' contributions to Provident Fund/ESIC for the assessment year 2018-19. The disallowance was initially made by the CPC due to late deposit of these contributions. The Tribunal, after noting the absence of the appellant's representation despite multiple opportunities, proceeded ex-parte. The Senior Departmental Representative (Sr.DR) supported the Revenue's stance by referencing the Supreme Court's judgment and other Tribunal decisions which affirmed that belated employees' contributions are taxable and not deductible under section 36(i)(va) of the Act if not deposited in time.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 122192 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 02-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 10-11-2021
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. vs CIT, Cemetile Industries vs ITO, Savleen Kaur & Others vs ITO
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 43B; 143(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “A” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1658/Del/2021 [Assessment Year : 2018-19] BT Data and Surveying Services India Pvt.Ltd., Level-2, Elegance Tower, Jasola District Centre, Old Mathura Road, New Delhi-110024. PAN-AAFCB7229Q vs ITO, Circle Int. Tax-4(2), Delhi. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 03.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement 07.02.2023 ORDER PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM : The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi dated 22.09.2021 arising from intimation dated 16.10.2019 passed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) concerning assessment year 2018-19. 2. As per grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged the disallowance of employees contribution to Provident Fund/ESIC u/s 36(i)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the Act. When the matter was called for hearing, none appeared for the assessee. It was seen that several opportunities have been given in the past for compliance. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Under these circumstances, we are constraint to proceed ex-parte in the absence of the assessee. Page | 2 3. Ld.Sr.DR for the Revenue on its part, contended that Central Processing Centre (“CPC”) has made additions of Rs.3,13,070/- to the returned income of the assessee on account of late deposit of employees contribution to Provident Fund/ESIC will process the return of income. In this regard, the action of the Revenue in making disallowance towards late deposit of employees contribution to Provident Fund/ESIC was supported by the judgement rendered in the case of Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. vs CIT (2022) 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC). Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue thus submitted that even for Assessment Years prior to Assessment Year 2021-22, belated employees contribution are to be reckoned as taxable income of the assessee u/s 2(24)(x) of the Act and the deduction u/s 36(i)(va) of the Act would not be permissible thereon in case of belated payments. Ld.Sr.DR for the Revenue further contended that the delayed deposit of employees contribution indicated in the Audit Report is sufficient for adjustment under section 143(1) of the Act, as held by the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Cemetile Industries vs ITO TS-933-ITAT-2022 (Pune). 4. The issue towards taxability of belated employees contribution to Provident Fund/ESIC is no longer res integra in the light of the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services (P.) Ltd. vs CIT (supra). The co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Cemetile Industries vs ITO (supra) had expressed a view that such adjustment/disallowance is also permissible in the proceedings carried out u/s 143(1) of the Act. Very recently, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Savleen Kaur & Others vs ITO in ITA Nos. 2249/Del/2022 & Others for Assessment Year 2018-19 & Others vide Page | 3 order dated 09.01.2023 has also taken a similar view and upheld the action of the Revenue. In parity with the view taken by Co-ordinate Benches, we do not see any merit in the appeal of the assessee. We thus, do not see any warrant to any reason to interfere with the order of Ld.CIT(A). 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed ex-parte. Order pronounced in the open Court on 07 th February, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER * Amit Kumar * Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI