KINETIC ADVERTISING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 16(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6051/MUM/2024

AI Insights

Kinetic Advertising India Private Limited appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which was passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal primarily contested the disallowance of a claim for the deposit of employees' contributions to the provident fund under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. The Tribunal noted that this issue had been conclusively decided by the Supreme Court against the assessee in a previous case. The Tribunal also acknowledged the withdrawal of some grounds by the assessee during the hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474451 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2022] 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HEMANSHU JOSHI
• Assessee Lawyers: NIKHIL TIWARI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Non-deduction of tax
• Section: 143(3); 250; 40(a)(ia)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6051/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2020-21) Kinetic Advertising India Private Limited, 7th and 8th Floor, Wing-A, The ORB-Sahar, Village Marol, Andheri East, Mumbai, Sahar P & T Colony S.O., Andheri-400 099 PAN: AABCP1311M vs Assistant Commissioner of Income tax – Circle 16(1), Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai-400 020 APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Nikhil Tiwari Respondent by : Shri Hemanshu Joshi (SR. DR.) Date of hearing : 15/01/2025 Date of pronouncement : 20/01/2025 O R D E R PER ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM: Instant appeal of the assessee was filed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi *for brevity, ‘Ld.CIT(A)’) passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, ‘the Act’), date of order 24/09/2024 for A.Y. 2020-21. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the Ld.Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department (for brevity the “Ld. AO”) 2 ITA No.6051 /Mum/2024 Kinetic Advertising India Pvt Ltd passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act, date of order 07/09/2022. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds: “Based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Kinetic Advertising India Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as \"Appellant\") respectfully craves leave to appeal and dismiss the order dated 24 September 2024 passed by the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [\"Learned CTT(A)\"] under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act') for AV 2020-21, on the following grounds, each of which is without prejudice to each other: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) has On validity of the appellate order 1. erred in violating 'principal of natural justice' wherein order was passed under Section 250 of the Act without granting opportunity of being heard via video conferencing and making the proceedings bad in law. On merits of the issues involved 2. erred in not allowing the claim of Appellant for deposit of employees' contribution to provident fund of Rs 5,44,561 u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, amend or delete the above grounds of appeal at any time before, or at the time of, hearing of the appeal, so as to enable the Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with the law. 2.1 The assessee has also raised the following additional grounds: “Based on the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, Kinetic Advertising India Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the Appellant') craves leave to prefer additional grounds of appeal in connection with the appeal filed against the order passed by the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax 3 ITA No.6051 /Mum/2024 Kinetic Advertising India Pvt Ltd (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') Claim for amount disallowed under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act in AY 2016-17 on account of non-deduction of taxes in AY 2016-17; 3. without prejudice to the grounds of appeal raised in AY 2016-17 before Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals [CIT(A)], the Appellant wishes to claim deduction of amount disallowed under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act (in AY 2016-17), on account of payment of taxes/ reversal of provisions in the subject AY of Rs 12,51,122. Claim for amount disallowed under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act in AY 2017-18 on account of non-deduction of taxes in AY 2017-18; 4. without prejudice to the grounds of appeal raised in AY 2017-18 before Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals [CIT(A)], the Appellant wishes to claim deduction of amount disallowed under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act (in AY 2017-18), on account of payment of taxes/ reversal of provisions in the subject AY of Rs 20,48,787. The Appellant craves leave to add, to alter, to amend, or to delete any or all of the above grounds of appeal, at or prior hearing of the appeal as may be required to enable the Appellate Tribunal to decide the appeal according to the law.” 3. The assessee has challenged the impugned appellate order. During the hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that Ground No. 1 is not being pressed, and Additional Grounds Nos. 3 and 4 are withdrawn. With respect to Ground No. 2, the Ld. AR stated that the addition pertains to the delayed payment of employees' contributions to the Provident Fund amounting to Rs.5,44,561/-, which was disallowed under the provisions of Section 36(1)(va) of the Act. This issue was brought before the Tribunal; however, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of 4 ITA No.6051 /Mum/2024 Kinetic Advertising India Pvt Ltd Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [2022] 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC), has already decided this matter against the assessee. 4. The Ld. DR accepted the submissions made by the assessee and did not present any adverse arguments. 5. Upon due consideration, we find that the issue raised under Ground No. 2 has already been settled against the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Ld. AR has also conceded to the dismissal of the same. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 and Additional Grounds Nos. 3 and 4 of the assessee’s appeal are dismissed as withdrawn, and Ground No. 2 of the appeal is dismissed on merits. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.6051/Mum/2024 is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 20th day of January 2025. Sd/- sd/- (AMARJIT SINGH) (ANIKESH BANERJEE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai,दिन ांक/Dated: 20/01/2025 Pavanan 5 ITA No.6051 /Mum/2024 Kinetic Advertising India Pvt Ltd Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी/The Appellant , 2. प्रदिव िी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकरआयुक्त CIT 4. दवभ गीयप्रदिदनदि, आय.अपी.अदि., मुबांई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. ग र्डफ इल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar), ITAT, Mumbai "