S.J.METAL INDUSTRIES, MUMBAI V. JAO WD 21(3) (2), CPC, BANGALORE, BANGALORE

ITA 2013/MUM/2021

AI Insights

The case involves S.J. Metal Industries appealing against a decision related to the deduction of employee's contributions to PF/ESIC under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2018-19. Initially, the ITAT allowed the deduction based on earlier ITAT decisions which permitted such deductions if the contributions were made before the due date of filing the income tax return. However, following a Supreme Court decision in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, which clarified that such contributions must be deposited by the employer within the prescribed due dates to qualify for deductions, the ITAT recalled its earlier order and restored the matter to the A.O for re-assessment in light of the Supreme Court's ruling.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 130160 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 19-03-2023
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 28-10-2021
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, M/s B I Worldwide India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Shri Satish Kumar Singh Vs. ITO
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 139(1)

Judgement Text

P a g e | 1 ITA No.2013/Mum/2021 S.J. Metal Industries Vs. CPC, Banglore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2013/Mum/2021 (A.Y.2018-19) S.J.Me tal Industrie s Ground Floor, Jain Est ate Jak ari a Road , Malad ( W) Mumbai – 400 06 4 Vs. Ce ntral Proce ssing Ce ntre , Bangalore , Judicial Asse ssing Office r: Ward 21(3)(2) 1 st Floor, Pre stige Apha No. 48/1 48/2 , Be rate naagrahara Be gur, Hosur Rd , Utt aran halli Hobli Be ngaluru Karnat aka – 5601 0 0 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/G IR No: AA TFS6124J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Bhupendra Shah Respondent by : C.T. Mathews Date of He aring 20.03.2023 Date of P ronounceme nt 24.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (AM): The ITAT vide order ITA No. 2013/Mum/2021 dated 13.05.2022 has allowed the claim of deduction on the ground that the assessee had deposited the employee’s contribution of provident fund before the due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. Subsequently, vide miscellaneous application no. 333/Mum/2022 the revenue seek to recall the order of the ITAT vide ITA No. 2013/Mum/2021 dated 13.05.2022 for assessment year 2018-19. On the basis of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT Dated 12.10.2022. Thereafter the impugned order was recalled by the ITAT vide order MA. No. 333/Mum/2022. 2. The revenue submitted that Tribunal vide ITA No. 2013/Mum/2021 the claim of deduction u/s 36(1)(va) of Rs.4,26,998/- P a g e | 2 ITA No.2013/Mum/2021 S.J. Metal Industries Vs. CPC, Banglore for the amount received from employee’s contribution to PF/ESIC was allowed following the decision of the ITAT Banglore M/s B I Worldwide India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 423/Bang/2021 dated 04.01.2022 & ITAT Hyderabad in the case of Shri Satish Kumar Singh Vs. ITO vide ITA No. 293/Hyd/2021 dated 23.08.2021 wherein held no disallowance can be made in respect of PF/ESI u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act, if the same are deposited on or before the due date of filing the return of income. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT-1 Civil appeal no. 2833 of 2016 dated 12.10.2022 held that if the employer’s did not deposit the amount towards employee’s contribution on or before the due date as prescribed in the EPF/ESIC the assessee was not entitled to the deduction. The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide the decision referred as supra set at rest the entire controversy wherein it is held that employer’s have to deposit the employee’s contribution towards PF/ESIC on or before the due date prescribed in the respective law for availing the deduction. 3. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide decision referred supra set at rest the entire controversy wherein it is held that employer’s have to deposit the employee’s contribution towards PF/ESIC on or before the due date prescribed in the respective law for availing deduction. 4. During the course of appellate proceedings before me the ld. Counsel referred the decision of coordinate bench in support of claim of deduction. However, I consider that the cases referred by the assessee are of no help in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT-1 Civil appeal no. 2833 of 2016 dated 12.10.2022. Therefore, following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court I restore this issue to the file of the A.O for deciding a fresh in accordance with the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT-I Civil Appeal No. 2833 of P a g e | 3 ITA No.2013/Mum/2021 S.J. Metal Industries Vs. CPC, Banglore 2016 dated 12.10.2022, therefore, the appeal of the assesse is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24.04.2023 Sd/- (Amarjit Singh) Accountant Member Place: Mumbai Date 24.04.2023 Rohit: PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यावपि प्रवि //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण/ ITAT, Bench, Mumbai.