M/S GURUJI INFRASTRUTURE PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI V. ADIT,CPC , BANGLORE

ITA 343/MUM/2023

AI Insights

M/s. Guruji Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed the disallowance of Rs.1,47,39,619 claimed towards Employees' contributions to provident fund/ESIC. The disallowance was initially made by the Central Processing Centre (CPC), Bangalore under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to late deposit of the contributions. The assessee argued that the contributions were made on the next working day when the due date fell on a Sunday or public holiday, citing the General Clauses Act. The Tribunal, considering the arguments and the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, decided to remand the matter back to the AO for a detailed verification of the deposit dates.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 299346 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 12-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (Civil Appeal No. 2833 of 2016 dated 12.10.2022)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.343/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2020-21) M/s. Guruji Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd 33, Plot 1088 Suraj Plaza, ‘A’ Wing, Chandulal Park, Station Rd Bhayandar (W), Thane-401101. बिधम/ Vs. ADIT, CPC Banglore. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAECG3499G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 13/04/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 26/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee company against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/(NFAC), Delhi dated 19.01.2023 for assessment year 2020-21. 2. The main grievance of the assessee is against the action of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC confirming the action of the CPC passed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) disallowing Rs.1,47,39,619/- claimed towards Employees contribution towards provident fund/ESIC. 3. Fact in brief are that the assessee company had filed its return of income on 24.02.2021 declaring total income of Rs.2,93,38,870/-. And thereafter, it received intimation dated 23.012.2021 from CPC, Bangalore u/s 143(1) of the Act wherein an amount of Rs.1,47,39,619/- was disallowed on account of late deposit of Employees contribution towards PF/ESIC in the relevant funds within Assessee by: Ms. Dinkle Hariya Revenue by: Ms. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR) ITA No.343/Mum/2023 A.Y. 2020-21 Guruji Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 2 the due-date as prescribed under the PF/ESIC Act. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the CPC, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC which was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order. Aggrieved, the assessee is before us. 4. At the outset, the Ld. AR, submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) ignored/over-looked the relevant facts and material brought to his notice that the assessee in fact has remitted the payments of PF/ESI within the due date as prescribed under the respective PF/ESIC Acts. And it was pointed out by the Ld. AR, that sometimes the due date fell on Sunday or on public holidays, therefore, the assessee had remitted the Employees contribution on the next day as prescribed by the General Clauses Act. Therefore, she prayed that the matter may be remanded back to the AO for verification and if the remittance made is found to be in accordance to law, the assessee should be given relief accordingly. 5. Per contra, the Ld. DR supported the action of the Ld. CIT(A) and according to him, in the light of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (Civil Appeal No. 2833 of 2016 dated 12.10.2022) the issue is no longer res- integra and therefore, does not want us to interfere with the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. The only issue is in respect of the disallowance made by the CPC u/s 143(1) of the Act regarding Employees contribution made to provident fund and ESIC to the tune of Rs.1,43,39,619/-. According to the Ld. AR, at times the due date as per PF/ESI Act fell on Sunday/Public ITA No.343/Mum/2023 A.Y. 2020-21 Guruji Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 3 Holiday, so the assessee had remitted the same on the next day/working day of the due date as allowed by General Clauses Act. In order to buttress this argument, she drew our attention to column no. 20(b) item no. 81 (details of contribution received for contribution of various funds as recorded to in Section 36(1)(va) of the Act) wherein she drew our attention to item no. 81 wherein contributions were purportedly made on 15.12.2019 of an amount of Rs.1,47,600/- and Rs.4,07,210/- and also of other dates like 15.03.2020, item no. 87 & 88 etc, and pointed out that the due date as per PF/ESI Act was on Sunday and therefore, the assessee had remitted the same on the next working day which is allowable by the General Clauses Act. Taking into consideration, the aforesaid facts as brought to our notice, for the interest of justice and fair play, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the issue back to the file of the AO, with a direction to look into the grievance of the assessee as to whether the assessee had deposited the Employees contribution of PF/ESIC within the due date as stipulated under PF/ESIC Act; and in any case, if the due date of remittance of Employees contribution of PF/ESIC fell on public holiday/Sunday, it need to be verified whether assessee deposited the employees contribution on the next working day, which fact may be looked into/verified by the AO; and if the assessee had remitted the same on the next working date [due-date being holiday] then AO to give relief accordingly as per General Clauses Act/Doctrine of impossibility to perform. Needless to say that an opportunity be given to the assessee before passing the order; and ITA No.343/Mum/2023 A.Y. 2020-21 Guruji Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 4 assessee is at liberty to file written submission/documents to substantiate its claim; and AO to pass order in accordance to law. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 26/04/2023. Sd/- Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) (ABY T. VARKEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 26/04/2023. Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) आदेश की प्रनिनलनि अग्रेनर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. ववभागीय प्रवतवनवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER, सत्यावपत प्रवत //True Copy// उि/सहधयक िंजीकधर /(Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीलीय अनर्करण, मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai