Karl Storz Endoscopy India Private Ltd. , Delhi V. JCIT Circle 13(1), Delhi

ITA 334/DEL/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Karl Storz Endoscopy India Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) which disallowed a deduction of INR 13,12,903. This deduction was initially claimed for the late deposit of employees' contributions to provident fund and ESI. The appellant argued that the contributions were deposited before the filing of the income tax return, seeking to overturn the disallowance. However, the Tribunal, referencing a Supreme Court decision, upheld the NFAC's order, emphasizing that late deposits of such contributions are not deductible under the Income Tax Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 113776 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-06-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 20-06-2023
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2022
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd., M/s. P.R. Packaging Service vs. ACIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.334/Del./2022 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2019-20) Karl Storz Endoscopy India Pvt. Ltd., vs. JCIT, Circle 13 (1), 11 th Floor, Dr. Gopal Das Bhawan, Delhi. 28, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110 001. (PAN : AZHPS3384D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Rishabh Malhota, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 21.06.2023 Date of Order : 22.06.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 22.12.2021 pertaining to Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The only issue involved in this appeal is as under :- “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming the order passed by the Ld. AO wherein it has been held that the deduction of INR 13,12,903 has been disallowed on account of late deposit of employees’ contribution to provident fund and ESI, without appreciating that the amount was duly deposited by the Appellant before filing of its return of income.” ITA No.334/Del./2022 2 3. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. We find that the issue involved i.e. late deposit of employees’ contribution to PF/ESI is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. (2022) 143 taxmann.com 178 wherein it has been held that if employees’ contribution of provident fund and ESI paid beyond due date as specified under the relevant Act then the same has to be added back in the income of the assessee. 4. However, ld. Counsel for the assessee has tried to distinguish the aforesaid decision of Hon’ble Apex Court by ITAT, Mumbai Bench decision in the case of M/s. P.R. Packaging Service vs. ACIT in ITA No.2376/Mum/2022 order dated 07.12.2022. We find that since the issue is covered by Hon’ble Apex Court decision in favour of the Revenue, the decision of ITAT is not being dealt with in this order. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 22 nd day of June, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (YOGESH KUMAR US) (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated the 22 nd day of June, 2023 TS ITA No.334/Del./2022 3 Copy forwarded to: 1.Appellant 2.Respondent 3.CIT 4.CIT (A) 5.CIT(ITAT), New Delhi. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.