Hylite Galvanisers P Ltd, Pune V. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC, Bangalore

ITA 94/PUN/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Hylite Galvanisers Private Limited appealing against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which confirmed disallowances made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under sections 36 and 43B of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2018-19. The disallowances pertained to late payments of employee's contributions to the Provident Fund and service tax, which were not paid by the due dates specified under the respective statutes. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the NFAC's decision and the AO's findings, and also upheld the mandatory charging of interest under section 234C.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 132851 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 08-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 02-02-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 43B; 139

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.94/PUN/2022 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Hylite Galvanisers Private Limited, 227/228, Plot No. 10/11, Mahalunge, Talegaon Road, Chakan, Pune-410501 PAN : AACCH4154M .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC – Bangalore ......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : N O N E Revenue by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 09-01-2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 10-01-2023 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 16-11-2021 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi for assessment year 2018-19. 2. We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 19 days. Upon hearing ld. DR, we find that the delay of 19 days is saved by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed during National Lockdown imposed on 2 ITA No.94/PUN/2022, A.Y. 2018-19 account of pandemic Covid-19. Therefore, the delay of 19 days is condoned. 3. The assessee filed Email letter dated 09-01-2023 seeking adjournment to prepare appeal case for proper representation. The ld. DR submitted that the issues raised in grounds of appeal are covered by the orders of this Tribunal and opposed the adjournment letter. On perusal of the grounds raised in Form No. 36, we find force in the submissions of ld. DR that the issues raised in the present appeal are covered by the orders of this Tribunal. Therefore, the adjournment letter filed by the assessee is rejected and we proceed to hear the appeal with the assistance of ld. DR and pass order on the examination of material available on record. 4. The assessee raised seven grounds of appeal amongst which the only two issues emanates for consideration is as to whether the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi justified in confirming the disallowance made by the AO, CPC, Bangalore u/s. 43B and 36 of the Act. 5. We find the details of payments of employee’s contribution to Provident Fund at para 4.5 of the impugned order. On careful examination of the same, we find the employee’s contribution was paid to Provident Fund scheme after due date of specified Act. Therefore, the disallowance confirmed by the NFAC, Delhi is justified and no interference is warranted from this Tribunal to an extent of addition made of Rs.87,984/- u/s. 36 of the Act. Thus, the first issue relating to late payments of employee’s contribution to Provident Fund is dismissed. 6. The next issue is payment of service tax and disallowance made u/s. 43B of the Act. 3 ITA No.94/PUN/2022, A.Y. 2018-19 7. The disallowance of such payment is evident from para 4.7 of the impugned order. It is not disputed by the ld. DR that the said payments were not made before due date of filing of return of income u/s. 139 of the Act. Therefore, the disallowance made by the CPC, Bangalore as confirmed by the NFAC, Delhi is justified. Thus, the addition of Rs.29,05,226/- is confirmed. Thus, the second issue regarding disallowance made u/s. 43B of the Act is dismissed. 8. In ground No. 8 the assessee has assailed charging of interest u/s. 234C of the Act. The charging of interest u/s. 234C is mandatory and consequential. Accordingly, ground No. 8 is dismissed. 9. In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 10 th January, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिनाांक / Dated : 10 th January, 2023. रदव आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi. 4. The CIT concerned. 5. दवभागीय प्रदतदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “ए” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 6. गार्ड फ़ाइल / Guard File. //सत्यादपत प्रदत// True Copy// आिेशानुसार / BY ORDER, वररष्ठ दनजी सदचव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune