IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH G MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI A.L.GEHLOT, AM & SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JM I.T.A.NO.2093/MUM/2009 - A.Y 2004-05 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF I.T. 8(1), MUMBAI M/S GSL INDIA LTD., POLYMERS PVT. LTD., PLOT NO.56, GSL HOUSE ROAD NO.17, MIDC, ANDHERI [W], MUMBAI 400 053 PAN NO.AAACG 2334 A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : MR. MOHD. USMAN. ASSESSEE BY : NONE O R D E R PER P.MADHAVI DEVI, JM: THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST CIT (A)S ORDER DATED 16/01/2009. 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE LD. CIT[A] HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE LATE PAYMENT OF P F & ESIC OF RS.19,17,656/- WHICH HAVE BEEN MADE DURING THE GRAC E PERIOD OF 5 DAYS, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE. A T THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. DR POINTED FROM PARA-4.3 OF THE CIT[A] S O RDER THAT THE CORRECT FIGURE IS RS.13,16,203/- AND NOT RS.19,17,656/-. ON BEING SATISFIED ABOUT THE CORRECTNESS OF THE FIGURE, WE TAKE THE FI GURE AS RS.13,16,203/-. 2 3. NONE WAS PRESENT FOR THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE. T HEREFORE WE DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERITS AFTER HEARING THE L D. DR HAS BEEN HEARD. 4. FROM THE GROUND OF APPEAL ITSELF IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE THE PAYMENT WITHIN THE GRACE PERIOD. WE FIND T HAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION O F THE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GANAPATI MILLS [243 ITR 29]. T HEREFORE, WE SEE NO MERIT IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS REJECTED. 5. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 10 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2010. SD/- SD/- (A.L.GEHLOT) (P.MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI: 10 TH MARCH, 2010. P/-* COPY TO- 1) APPELLANT 2) RESPONDENT 3) CITA MUMBAI. 4) CIT CITY MUMBAI 5) DR BENCH MUMBAI TRUE COPY BY ORDER DY/AS ST.REGISTRAR,ITAT MUMBAI.