ITO,Ward-4(1), Gurgaon V. Sandeep Sandha, Gurgaon

ITA 2075/DEL/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4881 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 43; 22

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G” DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.As. No. 2075, 2076 & 2077/DEL/2022 Assessment Years 2017-18, 2019-20 & 2020-21 ITO, Ward-4(1), Gurgaon, Haryana. v. Sandeep Sandha, 99/277/2, Gali No.4, Opp. Utsar Garden, Atul Kataria Chowk, Gurgaon. TAN/PAN: ASYPS1366D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Ms. Kajal Singh, Sr.DR Date of hearing: 21 09 2022 Date of pronouncement: 21 09 2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: The c ap ti one d ap p eal s ha ve be en f ile d a t the i ns ta nc e o f the Re ven ue a ga in st t he or de rs of th e Co mmi s si on er of Inco me Ta x (Ap pe al s) , G ur ga on [ ‘C IT (A )’ in sho rt ], dat ed 15. 04.2 01 9, 20. 05 .2 02 0 an d 2 1. 09. 20 21 ari si ng f ro m th e as se ss ment o rde r pa ss ed un der S ec tio n 14 3(1 ) of th e I nc o me Ta x Ac t, 19 6 1 ( th e A ct ) con ce rn in g AY 2 01 7-1 8, 2 01 9- 20 a nd 20 20- 21 r es pe ctive l y. 2. As pe r it s gro un d s of a ppe al in al l the th re e a pp ea ls , th e Re ven ue ha s ch al l eng ed th e re ve rs al of disa ll ow an ce ma de b y t he As ses si ng Of f icer un der Sec ti on 36 (1 )(v a) r .w . Se ctio n 2(2 4) (x ) of the A ct o n ac co un t of dela ye d de po s it of e mp lo ye e ’ s c ont ri bu ti on to war ds P F an d ES I C. 3. The C IT (A ) h as re v ers ed th e act io n of the A ss es si ng Of f ic er in 2 its a pp el lat e or der . 4. Bo th th e pa rti es w e re he ar d i n le ng th o n t he i ssue in d is pu te. 5. On p er us al of th e rec ord s, we o bs e rve tha t t he Ass e ssi ng Of f icer ha s mad e the i mpu gn ed ad di tio n o n t he gr ou nd t hat th e ass es se e ha s de po s ite d e mpl o ye e ’s c o ntr ib ut io n to ward s Pro vi den t Fu nd a nd E SI af te r due da te a s pr esc rib ed u nd er t he re l eva nt A ct / Ru les in br ea ch of Exp la na ti on 5 t o Sec ti on 43 B of t h e Ac t. Th e As ses si ng Of f icer acc or di ng l y r es o rte d t o t he a dd ition s u nd er Sec ti on 3 6( 1)( va ) r ead w it h Se cti on 2 ( 24) (x ) of th e Ac t. 6. It i s t he ca se of t h e as se ss ee bef or e l ow er a ut ho ri tie s t h at i t has dep os it ed t he e mp lo ye e ’s c on tr ib u tio n in E P F and ES I bef or e th e due dat e of f ilin g of retur n of inc o me st ip ula te d un der Sec ti on 13 9(1 ) of t he Ac t. 7. W e f in d t ha t th e i d ent ic al i ss ue ha s b een de ci ded in f a v our of the as se sse e b y t he Hon ’b le Del hi Hi g h Co ur t i n th e ca se of Pr. CI T vs. Pr o I nt er ac ti v e Se rv ic e ( In di a) Pvt . L td . v id e o r der d ate d 10. 09 .2 01 8 i n I T A N o. 98 3/2 01 8. T he e xt rac t of t he jud g men t i s rep ro du ce d a s un de r: “ I n v i e w o f t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h e D i v i s i o n B e n c h o f De l h i H i g h C o u r t i n C o m m i s s i o n e r o f I n c o m e - T a x v e r s u s A i m i l L im i t e d , ( 2 0 1 0 ) 3 2 1 I T R 5 0 8 ( D e l ) t h e i s s u e i s c o v e r e d a g a i n s t t h e R e v e n u e a n d , t h e r e f o r e , n o s u b s t a n t i a l q u e s t i o n o f l a w a r i s e s f or c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h i s a p p e a l . T h e l e g i s l a t i v e i n t e n t w a s / i s t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e am o u n t p a i d i s a l l o w e d a s a n e x p e n d i t u r e o n l y w h e n p a y m e n t i s a c t ua l l y m a d e . We d o n o t t h i n k t h a t t h e l e g i s l a t i v e i n t e n t a n d o b j e c ti v e i s t o t r e a t b e l a t e d p a y m e n t o f E m p l o y e e ' s P r o v i d e n t F u n d ( E P F ) a n d E m p l o y e e ' s S t a t e I n s u r a n c e S c h e m e (E S I ) a s d e e m e d in c o m e o f t h e 3 e m p l o y e r u n d e r S e c t i o n 2 ( 2 4 ) ( x ) o f t h e A c t . ” 8. W e a ls o ta ke no te of the p le a of th e as se ss ee t ha t de la ye d pa yme nt of e mp lo yee’ s co nt ri bu ti on t o PF /E SI C i s not d isa ll ow ab le as th e a me nd me nts to S ect io n 3 6(1 )( va ) and Se cti on 43 B ef f ected b y Fi nan ce A ct , 20 2 1 we re ap pl ic ab le pro spe ct iv el y in rela ti on t o As ses s me nt Ye ar 20 21- 22 a nd s ub s equ en t ye a rs . Th e ref or e, th e cla i m of de du ct io n of contr ib ut io n to E mp lo ye e ’s Sta te Insu ra nc e Sc he me (E SI ) an d Pr ovi de nt F un d u/ s .36 (1 )( va ) co uld no t be de ni ed to th e as se ss ee in As ses s me nt Ye ar s 20 17- 18 , 20 19 -20 a nd 2 02 0-2 1 in q ue st io n o n t he bas is of a men d men ts mad e b y F in an ce Act , 2 02 1. Fo r th is pr op osi ti o n, w e f in d su pp or t f ro m t he d ec is io n of the C o- ord in at e Be nc h o f Trib una l i n th e ca se of T he Co nt in en tal Res ta ur a nt an d C afé C o mp any vs . I TO a s re por te d in (2 02 1) 9 1 IT R ( Tr ib .)( S. N. ) 60 (B an g. ) a nd Ad y ar A na nd a Bh av an Sw eets In di a P. L td . vs . AC IT , IT A N o. 40 2 an d 40 3/ C hny / 2 021 or der da te d 0 8.1 2. 20 21. Co ns eq uen tl y, we s ee n o e rr or i n t he o rde rs of the CI T( A) an d th eref o re de cli ne t o in terf e re. 9. In th e res ul t, a ll th r ee ap pe als of th e R eve nu e are d is mi ss ed. Order was pronounced in the open Court on 21/09/2022. Sd/- Sd/- [CHANDRA MOHAN GARG] [PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 21/09/2022 Prabhat