Gallagher Service Center LLP, Pune V. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

ITA 693/PUN/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5720 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2024
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 10; 143(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.693/PUN/2024 Assessment Year : 2020-21 Gallagher Service Center LLP, 401, A,B,C,D,E,F & G, Delta 2, Gigaspace Complex, Viman Nagar, Pune – 411014 Vs. ACIT , Pune PAN: AAQFG7417F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Department by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date of hearing : 16-07-2024 Date of pronouncement : 22-07-2024 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.02.2024 of CIT(A)-4, Hyderabad relating to assessment year 2020-21. 2. The only effective ground raised by the assessee reads as under. “1. Ground 1- Disallowance of expenditure in respect of employees‟ contribution of Provident Fund and Employee State Insurance (ESI). The learned CIT(A) has erred in upholding the addition made by learned DCIT, CPC in disallowing expenditure of Rs.1,06,15,630 in relation to employees‟ contribution to provident fund and ESI under section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 („Act‟) even though the same has been paid before the prescribed due date under the respective statutory acts read with Section 10 of General Clauses Act 1977. 2 ITA No.693/PUN/2024 In doing so, the learned CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the decision of the Hon‟ble Delhi ITAT in the case of Whirlpool of India Ltd. [19 SOT 593 (2008)] wherein Hon‟ble ITAT has held that employees‟ contribution paid on next working day following the statutory due which falls on a public holiday is payment within prescribed due date considering section 10 of the General Clauses Act 1897 and accordingly same should not be disallowed under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute, amend or delete one or more of the above grounds of appeal on or before or at the time of hearing of the appeal, so as to enable the Honorable Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to dispose of the appeal according to law.” 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing despite service of notice. However, this being a covered matter in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and in view of the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2018 -19; this appeal was taken up for adjudication. 4. After hearing the ld. DR and on perusal of the record we find that the assessee is a Firm and filed its return of income on 12.02.2021 declaring total income at Rs.60,75,25,950/- and claimed credit for TDS at Rs.6,77,774/-. The CPC while processing the return, vide intimation u/s. 143(1) dated 25.12.2021 made addition of Rs.2,93,14,597/- on account of delayed payment of employees’ contribution to PF /ESI u/s.36(1)(va)of the Act. 4.1. In appeal ld. CIT(A) upheld the action of the CPC. 3 ITA No.693/PUN/2024 5. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. After hearing the ld.DR and on perusal of record we find that the only issue that requires adjudication is disallowance of Rs.1,06,15,630/- on account of delayed payment of employees’ contribution to PF /ESI. We find the issue now stands decided against the assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd. & Ors. Vs CIT & Ors reported in 448 ITR 518 where it has been held that the deduction of the Employees’ share of contribution to PF/ ESI can be allowed u/s 36(1)(va) only if it is deposited before the time limit under the respective statutes and not by the due date u/s.139(1) of the Act. Since the assessee in the instant case has admittedly deposited the employees’ contribution to the PF/ESI after the specified dates mentioned in the respective act, therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the disallowance made by the CPC. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly dismissed 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22 nd July, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- \S SSd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT प ु णे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 22 nd July, 2024 Ashwini 4 ITA No.693/PUN/2024 आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. 4. DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune 5 ITA No.693/PUN/2024 S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 16.07.2024 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 19.07.2024 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member 22.07.2024 JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member 22.07.2024 AM/AM 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS 22.07.2024 Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on 22.07.2024 Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order 22.07.2024 Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk 22.07.2024 Sr. PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order