Suryam Diagnostic Centre, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad

ITA 41/AHD/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Suryam Diagnostic Centre appealing against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed the addition of \\u20b9 54,822/- to the income of the assessee for late payment of PF and ESIC. The assessee argued that they had already disallowed a sum of \\u20b9 49,086/- in their Income Tax Return (ITR) for the same issue, and thus, the additional disallowance was a case of double disallowance. The Tribunal decided to verify the assessee's claim and directed the matter back to the CIT(A) for further examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 125677 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 18-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 19-01-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 15

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I .T .A . No .4 1/ A h d / 2 02 3 ( A s se ss m e nt Y e a r : 20 18- 19 ) Su r ya m D i a g no st ic C e ntr e , 2- 3 S h i ta l V ar s h a C o m ple x , Nr . S hi vr an j a n i C r o ss R oa d , A m ba wa di, A h m ed ab a d- 3 8 00 15 V s. I nc o m e Ta x O f fic er , Wa r d - 3( 3) ( 5 ) , A h m e da ba d [ P AN N o. A D DF S 3 69 6N ] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Sunil Maloo, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. D.R. D a t e of H ea r i ng 19.07.2023 D a t e of P r o no u n ce me nt 26.07.2023 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”) National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi vide order dated 12.01.2023 passed for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1. The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 54,822/- originally made by the CPC, Bangalore in respect of disallowance of Rs. 37403/- for PF and Rs. 17419/- for ESIC i.e. total Rs. 54,822/- for late payment than statutory date for employees contribution without considering the disallowance of Rs. 31445/- for PF and Rs. 17641/- for ESIC i.e. Rs. 49,086/- already done at the time of filing of ITR in our computation of Income. We have ITA No. 41/Ahd/2023 Suryam Diagnostic Centre vs. ITO Asst.Year –2018-19 - 2 - already disallowed of Rs. 49086/- towards late payment of PF and ESIC against the CPC disallowance of Rs. 54822/- for late payment of PF and ESIC hence the difference amount of Rs.5736/- should be consider for disallowance. 2. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, delete or alter one or more ground of appeals.” 3. The brief issue for consideration before us is that the CPC disallowed and added a sum of ₹ 54,822/- to the income of the assessee on account of late payment of PF and ESIC. The assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(Appeals) and contended that the assessee has already disallowed a sum of ₹ 49,086/- towards late payment of PF and ESIC at the time of filing of ITR in the computation of income and accordingly, the disallowance should be restricted to a sum of ₹ 5,736/- only. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) however did not agree with the submissions made by the assessee and confirmed the disallowance. The assessee is in appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(Appeals) confirming the disallowance made by CPC. 4. Before us, the counsel for the assessee submitted that since the assessee has already made the disallowance of a sum of ₹ 49,086/ - in the computation of income in the ITR, it would amount to double disallowance if this sum is again disallowed by the assessing officer on account of late payment of PF and ESIC. It was submitted by the counsel for the assessee that Ld. CIT(Appeals) in the appellate order only discussed with regards to the retrospectivity of the Act with respect to the aforesaid ESI and PF laws and did not discuss the facts of the assessee’s case at all. The counsel for the assessee drew our attention to page 57 of the paper book (copy of ITR filed for the impugned assessment ITA No. 41/Ahd/2023 Suryam Diagnostic Centre vs. ITO Asst.Year –2018-19 - 3 - year) and submitted that a sum of ₹ 49,086/- has already been offered to tax by the assessee on account of late deposit of PF and ESIC in the return of income. In response, the Ld. DR relied on the observations made by Ld. CIT(Appeals) in the appellate order. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. On going to the facts of the case placed before us, we are hereby restoring the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(Appeals) for carrying out the necessary verification as to whether the assessee has offered a sum of ₹ 49,086/- on account of late deposit of PF and ESIC and, if it is found that the aforesaid sum has already been offered to tax by the assessee in the return of income, then credit of the same shall be allowed and the addition should be restricted only to the differential/balance amount of ₹ 5,736/- only. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 26/07/2023 Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 26/07/2023 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश क त ल प अ े षत/ Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. संबं धत आयकर आय ु त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आय ु त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. वभागीय त न ध, आयकर अपील!य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड' फाईल / Guard file. आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad