Hazira Packaging and Engg. Services, Surat V. ITO, Ward-2(3)(6), Surat, Surat

ITA 3/SRT/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 103 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9659 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 19-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 09-01-2022
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT “SMC BENCH” BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3/SRT/2022 (AY: 2018-19) (Physical Court hearing) Hazira Packaging & Engineering Services, At & Post. Mora, Tal. Choryasi, Surat, Gujarat – 394510. PAN : AADFH3979C Vs The ITO, Ward-2(3)(6), Surat. APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri Nitin Gheewala, AR Respondent by Shri J. K. Chandnani, Sr. DR Date of hearing 20/10/2022 Date of pronouncement 27/10/2022 Order under section 254(1) of Income-tax Act Per Pawan Singh, Judicial Member: 1. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘NFAC’ or CIT(A)”], dated 15/11/2021 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19, which in turn arises against assessment order passed by the Central Processing Centre (CPC) Bangalore under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’], dated 25/10/2018. The assessee has raised the following grounds: “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case the NFAC erred in not deleting the addition of Rs.2,56,206/- though the PF and ESI was paid before the due dates prescribed by the relevant Acts. 2. In facts and circumstances of the case the NFAC erred in not deleting the addition of Rs.6,58,696/- though the PF and ESI was 2 ITA No.3/SRT/2022/AY.2018-19 Hazira Packaging & Engineering Services paid before the due date of filing the ROI as the same was paid after the due date as prescribed by the relevant Acts. 3. The appellant reserves his right to alter, amend, modify and add any grounds of appeal.” 2. At the outset of hearing, the Learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that assessee has basically two raise grounds of appeal. Grounds no.2 is now covered against the assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Checkmate Services Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Income tax, in Civil Appeal No.2833 of 2016, dated 12.12.2022, wherein Hon'ble Court has held that it is an essential condition for deduction of employees’ contribution of ESI and PF, are deposited on or before the due date. Considering the submissions of ld. AR for the assessee, ground No.2 of the appeal is dismissed as not pressed. 3. So far as ground No.1 is concerned, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessee has made the payment of employee’s contribution of PF of Rs.2,56,206/-on 10.02.2018, before the due date under the relevant Acts. The due date for deposits of such contribution was 15.02.2018. The lower authority has not verified the fact properly. The due date of payment of such employees’ contribution was wrongly mentioned in audit report on 16.12.2018 in place of 10.02.2018. The ld. AR submits that he had limited prayer before the Bench to direct the Assessing Officer to verify the fact and allow relief to the assessee. The ld. AR for the assessee furnished the following details of employees’ contribution of ESI and PF: 3 ITA No.3/SRT/2022/AY.2018-19 Hazira Packaging & Engineering Services Nature of Fund Sum received from employees and amount paid (Rs.) Date of Payment correctly reported in Audit report Due Date of Payment as per Act Actual Date of Payment Amount Paid within due date as per Act Amount not Paid within due date as per Act PF - July 170828 21.08.2017 15.08.2017 21.08.2017 170828 PF - July 116948 17.08.2017 15.08.2017 17.08.2017 116948 PF - Nov 257708 21.12.2017 15.12.2017 21.12.2017 257708 PF - Jan 256206 15.02.2018 10.02.2018 256206 ESI - Nov 62018 24.12.2017 24.12.2017 62018 ESI - Dec 51194 22.01.2018 22/01/2018 51194 914902 256206 658696 4. On the other hand, Learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the Revenue submits that the lower authority has passed the order on the basis of information provided by assessee. On my special query for verification, as actual date of payment which was allegedly wrongly recorded in audit report, the ld. Sr. DR for revenue fairly agreed that Assessing Officer may be directed to verify the fact and pass the order in accordance with law. 5. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the order of lower authorities. I find that the ld. AR of the assessee made a very limited prayer before me for verification of facts that employee’s contribution of PF was deposited before the due date in the relevant Act, by furnishing the details of certain payment to the extent of Rs.2,56,206/-. Considering the submissions of both the parties, I direct the Assessing Officer to verify the fact and allow appropriate relief to the assessee to that extent, if the assessee has deposited such contribution before the due date under the relevant statutory provisions and pass the order in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to provide 4 ITA No.3/SRT/2022/AY.2018-19 Hazira Packaging & Engineering Services relevant challan and evidences and further explained the fact before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is directed to pass the order within the three months of receipt copy of this order. In the result, ground no.1 of the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in open court on 27/10/2022. Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER Surat, Dated: 27/10/2022 SAMANTA Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR /True copy/ By order // TRUE COPY // Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Surat