SONIGARA GOLD LLP, PUNE V. ITO, WARD-9(3), PUNE

ITA 179/PUN/2023

AI Insights

Sonigara Gold LLP, engaged in the retail business of trading in jewellery, filed its return for the assessment year 2019-20, declaring a total income of \\u20b965,32,400. The return was processed by the ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru, disallowing \\u20b91,50,730 under section 36(1)(va) due to late deposit of employees' contributions towards PF/ESIC. The appellant contested this disallowance before the first appellate authority but was unsuccessful, leading to the present appeal before the ITAT. The Tribunal, referencing a Supreme Court decision, upheld the disallowance, emphasizing the necessity of adhering to statutory due dates for deposit of such contributions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 136281 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 02-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 12-02-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. Vs CIT & Ors
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(1); 250

Judgement Text

॥ आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण, पुणे “बी” न्यायपीठ, पुणे में ॥ ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No. 179/PUN/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Sonigara Gold LLP, S.No.201,Opp.Jayshree Talkies, Mumbai Pune Highway,Chinchwad – 411019 PAN: ADBFS5142D . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s ITO, Ward 9(3), Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee by : Shri Suhas Bora Revenue by : Shri M. G. Jasnani सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 03/04/2023 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date of Pronouncement : 03/04/2023 आदेश / ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; The appellant assessee assailed the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for short “CIT(A) /NFAC”] dt. 19/12/2022 passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act,1961 [for short “the Act”], which ascended out of assessment order dt. 01/05/2020 passed u/s 143(1) by the ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru [for short “AO”] for assessment year [for short “AY”] 2019-20. Sonigara Gold LLP ITA No.179/PUN/2023 A.Y. 2019-20 ITAT-Pune Page 2 of 4 2. Without rearticulating grounds of appeal its apt to voice that, the substantive ground of present appeal is directed against disallowance made u/s 36(1)(va) through processing of return u/s 143(1) of the Act on the basis of information reported in tax audit report [for short “TAR”]. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are; the appellant is a partnership firm engaged in the retail business of trading in jewellery, filed its return of income for the AY 2019-20 on 28/08/2019 declaring total income of ₹65,32,400/-. The return was processed by the ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru u/s 143(1) of the Act disallowing an amount of ₹1,50,730/- u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act on account of employee’s Contribution towards PF/ESIC paid beyond the respective due dates. 4. Aggrieved thereby the appellant unsuccessfully contested the aforestated disallowance before first appellate authority. For the reason the appellant by present appeal challenged the action stating that both Sonigara Gold LLP ITA No.179/PUN/2023 A.Y. 2019-20 ITAT-Pune Page 3 of 4 the lower tax authorities erred in law and facts in disallowing the sum u/s 36(1)(va) by way of processing of return of income filed through summary assessment u/s 143(1) of the Act 5. The Ld. DR however supported the action of both the tax authorities below by placing his strong reliance on the recent landmark judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in “Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. Vs CIT & Ors” reported in 448 ITR 518 and prayed for dismissal of appeal. 6. After considering the rival submission, vehement arguments and perusal of material placed on record in the light of rule 18 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 we hardly see any merits in the contention of the appellant seeking reversal of disallowance carried out for not adhering to the provisions of section 36(1)(va) of the Act In the light of decision rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court in “Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. Vs CIT & Ors” (Supra). Sonigara Gold LLP ITA No.179/PUN/2023 A.Y. 2019-20 ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 4 7. In the evince of undisputed fact that the appellant assessee has failed to deposit sum received from its employees to which the provisions of section 2(24)(x) applies, within the statutory due date prescribed to the relevant fund under the respective Act, rule, order or notification, the disallowances u/s 36(1)(va) invites, and we hold so in the light of ‘“Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. Vs CIT & Ors” (Supra). 7. Resultantly, the appeal of the assessee stands DISMISSED. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, the order pronounced in the open court on this Monday 03 rd day of April, 2023. -S/d - -S/d- S. S. GODARA G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / PUNE ; दिन ांक / Dated : 12th day of April, 2023. Ashwini आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT -1 (MH-India) 4. The CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi (India) 5. DR, ITAT, Pune Bench ‘B’, Pune 6. ग र्डफ़ इल / Guard File. आिेश नुस र / By Order वररष्ठ दनजी सदिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय न्य य दिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.