M/s. Sheela Foam Ltd., Ghaziabad V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5417/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1380 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-05-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 18-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: H K CHOUDHARY CIT DR
• Section: 43B; 143(3); 234B; 139(1)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G, NEW DELHI , ! ' $%&'()*+,-+! BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, V.P & SHRI PRASHANT MAHAR ISHI, AM . / ITA NO.5417/DEL/2016 / ) ) / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 M/S. SHEELA FOAM LTD., (FOPRMERLY KNOWN AS SHEELA FOAM PVT.LTD.), 37/2, SITE-IV, SAHIBABAD INDUSTRIAL AREA, GHAZIABAD. PAN-AAACS0189B .......... 01 /APPELLANT VS THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-06, NEW DELHI. . $201 / RESPONDENT 0134+ / APPELLANT BY : NONE $20134+ / RESPONDENT BY : SH.H.K.CHOUDHARY, CIT DR 3&, / DATE OF HEARING : 19.03.2020 56 3&, / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 21.05.2020 +% / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA,VP THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS AGAINST OR DER OF CIT(A)-24, NEW DELHI DATED 31.08.2016 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 AGAINST ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APP EAL:- 1. THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) E RRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.2,52,962 UNDER SECTION 2(24)(X) READ WITH SEC TION 36(1) (VA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT), ON ACCOUNT OF ALL EGED DELAY IN DEPOSITION ITA NO.5417/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 2 OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO PROVIDENT FUND (PF) AND EMPLOYEE STATE INSURANCE (ESI) IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONS IDERATION. 1.1. THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE AFORESAID AMOUN T WAS COLLECTED AND DEPOSITED BY THE APPELLANT WITHIN THE DUE DATE SPEC IFIED UNDER SECTION 139(1) AND THE SAME WAS, THEREFORE, ALLOWABLE AS DE DUCTION IN TERMS OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43B OF THE ACT. 1.2. THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT FOLLOWING THE BINDING DECISION OF THE IN COME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE APPELLANTS OWN CASE FOR THE EARLIE R ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01, IN GROSS VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF JUDICI AL DISCIPLINE. 2. THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ER RED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT DELETING THE INTEREST CHARGED UNDER SECT ION 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. 3. THE ASSESSEE MOVED AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNME NT WHICH IS DISMISSED ON THE GROUND THAT THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL STANDS COVERED BY THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA. 4. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEA L BUT THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IS AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS.2,52,962/- U/ S 2(24)(X) R.W.S. 36(1)(VA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 5. BRIEFLY IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE THERE WAS DELAY IN DEPOSIT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO PROVIDENT FUND (IN SHORT PF) AND THE EMPLOYEE STATE INSURANCE (IN SHORT ESI) BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 6. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THE ASSESSEE TO BE DE FAULT IN VIEW OF PROVISION OF SECTION 2(24)(X) R.W.S. 36(1)(VA) OF THE ACT AND , AN ADDITION OF RS.2,52,962/- WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE AO, AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. ITA NO.5417/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 3 7. WE FIND THAT THE PRESENT ISSUE RAISED IN THE APP EAL AGAINST DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S 2(24)(X) R.W.S. 36(1)(VA) OF THE ACT STAND S COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT I N CIT VS ALOM EXTRUSIONS [2009] 319 ITR 306 (SC). FOLLOWING THE SAME PARITY OF REASONING, WE HOLD THAT WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED THE SAID AMOUNT ON ACCOUNT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION TO PROVIDENT FUND AND EMPLOYEE STATE I NSURANCE BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME, THEN, THE ASSES SEE CANNOT BE HELD TO BE IN DEFAULT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY VERIFY THIS PA RTICULAR ASPECT OF DEPOSITING THE ALLEGED AMOUNT BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING TH E RETURN OF INCOME. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FILE THE REQUISITE DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THIS REGARD AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS ALSO DIREC TED TO AFFORD REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE ISSUE IN LINE WITH OUR DIRECTION. GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSE E ARE THUS ALLOWED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST MAY, 2020. SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) +, - / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ! / VICE PRESIDENT / DATED : 21 ST MAY, 2020 * AMIT KUMAR * ITA NO.5417/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 4 +%3$/&7(8+(&9 COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. 01 / THE APPELLANT 2. $201 / THE RESPONDENT 3. :& ; < / THE CIT(A) 4. = :& / THE PR. CIT 5. 6. (>?$/&/ * * / DR, ITAT, DELHI ?@)A9 GUARD FILE. +% / BY ORDER , 2(&$/& // TRUE COPY // ' B-C , * ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI