Bhavin Agrawal, Ahmedabad V. The DCIT, CPC, Bangluru

ITA 83/AHD/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6731 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-03-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 20-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S.S. SHUKLA
• Assessee Lawyers: HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURTS
• Section: 143(1)

Judgement Text

ITA N o. 83/Ahd/ 2020 Assess ment Year: 2018-19 Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) ITA No.83/Ahd/2020 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Bhavin Agrawal, vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, 448, Phase-II, CPC, Bangaluru. G.I.D.C., Vatva, Ahmedabad – 382 445. [PAN – ADYPA 4124 C] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri A.P. Nanavaty, A.R. Respondent by : Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 10.03.2022 Date of pronouncement : 17.03.2022 O R D E R PER BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI: 1. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 22.11.2019 passed by the by the learned CIT(A)-3, Ahmedabad in Appeal No. CIT(A)-3/Cir.3(3)/10245/2018-19/598 for the Assessment Year 2018-19, which in turn arises from the intimation passed u/s 143(1) on 09.08.2019 by the CPC, Bangaluru. 2. The only grievance raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.5,27,121/- for the late payment of Employees’ Contribution to PF/ESI after the due dates under the applicable laws. 3. Learned representatives of both sides instantly agree that the aforesaid issue is squarely covered against the assessee by Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court’s judgment in the case of CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, 366 ITR 170 (Guj.), wherein it is categorically held that in the case of delayed deposit of employees’ contribution to PF, the same will not be deductible in computing taxable income under the head “Income from Business or Profession”. The law declared by ITA N o. 83/Ahd/ 2020 Assess ment Year: 2018-19 Page 2 of 2 this decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is binding on us. The mere fact that an appeal against the said decision is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court does not dilute the binding nature of this decision. As regard dismissal of the SLP in the case of Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Ltd. (2017) 84 taxmann.com 185 (SC), it is a settled law that when a SLP is dismissed by a non-speaking order, it does not constitute a law declared by Hon’ble Supreme Court, and as such, it is not binding under Article 141 of the Constitution of India. This has been so held in State of Manipur vs. Thingujam Brojen Meetai, (1996) 9 SCC 29; Om Prakash Gargi vs. State of Punjab, (1996) 11 SCC 399 and Sun Export Corpn vs. Collector of Customs, AIR 1997 SC 2658. Respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation (supra), we do not find any merit in the claim of assessee. Therefore, we dismiss the grievance of assessee. 4. In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Pronounced in the court on the 17 th March, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI) Judicial Member Accountant Member Ahmedabad, the 17 th day of March, 2022 PBN/* Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad