Pr.Commissioner of Income tax-1, Coimbatore V. C R TEXTILE MILLS , ATHANOOR

MA 208/CHNY/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8560 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 22-02-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 22-02-2024
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 27-10-2022
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Revision of order; Set aside
• Section: 263; 143(3); 254(2)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘सी’ ायपीठ चे ई म । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा01 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कु मार अ6वाल ,लेखा सद9 के सम1। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM M.A. No.208/Chny/2022 [In ITA No.54/Chny/2021] (िनधा:रण वष: / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Income Tax Officer Ward 2 Namakkal बनाम/ V s. M/s C.R.Textile Mills 204,2B, Attayampatti Road Athanoor Post – 636 301. थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./P AN /GI R No . AACFJ-9421-A (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ की ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR थ की ओरसे/Respondent by : Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate)-Ld. AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 23.02.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 23.02.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. By way of captioned Miscellaneous Application, the Revenue seeks our indulgence in Tribunal order passed in captioned appeal on 19.04.2022. 2. In the application, the revenue has submitted that the return of income as filed by the assessee was accepted in scrutiny assessment proceedings u/s 143(3). However, it was seen from Form 3CD statements that the assessee failed to remit the Employee’s Contribution - 2 - of PF & ESI amounting to Rs.2,85,420/- to the concerned authorities within the due dates as prescribed in the respective statute in terms of Sec.36(1)(va) of the Income tax Act and therefore, the same was to be added back to the income of the assessee. Accordingly, a proposal was moved for invocation of revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263. The revisionary authority set aside the assessment u/s 263 vide order dated 29.01.2021. Subsequently, set aside assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 was completed on 27.09.2021 by making the aforesaid addition. 3. In the meanwhile, the assessee assailed revisionary jurisdiction before Tribunal which was allowed vide order dated 19.04.2022. The same was allowed on merits by following the decision rendered in M/s Benco Thermal Technologies Private Ltd. (ITA N.281/Chny/2021 dated 23.02.2022). The bench following its earlier decision, on merits, held that the assessment order could not be held to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Accordingly, the order passed u/s 263 was quashed. 4. It has further been submitted in the application that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services P. Ltd. Vs CIT (143 Taxmann.com 178; dated 12.10.2022) has held that this deduction could be allowed only if the same was remitted within the date dates as specified in the respective law. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has laid down the correct position of law and this issue has now been put to rest. In the present case, the assessee has admittedly not deposited the dues within the prescribed due date and therefore, a prayer has been made by revenue to recall the order passed by the Tribunal in captioned appeal. The Ld. Sr. DR thus pleaded for upholding the revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, pleaded for dismissal of the - 3 - application on the ground that the assessee assailed revisionary jurisdiction on the ground that adequate enquiries were made by Ld. AO, in this regard and due verification was carried out by him during the course of assessment proceedings. Having heard rival submissions, the application is disposed-off as under. 5. It is undisputed fact that the impugned issue, on merits, is now squarely covered in revenue’s favor by the cited decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is also clear that the Tribunal, while disposing-off assessee’s appeal assailing the revisionary order, went into the merits of the issue and chose to follow its earlier decision which was rendered in assessee’s favor. The revisionary order was not quashed on the ground that adequate enquiries were made by Ld. AO and due verification was carried out by him during the course of assessment proceedings. This being the case, the argument of Ld. AR could not be accepted. There is nothing on record which would show that such enquiries or verification was carried out by Ld. AO during the course of assessment proceedings. Therefore, since now this issue has been settled by the verdict of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we have no hesitation in correcting the aforesaid mistake u/s 254(2) of the Act. The decision rendered by Tribunal in captioned appeal run contrary to the subsequent decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court and therefore, we reverse our findings as given in ITA No.54/Chny/2021 order dated 19-04-2022. In other words, the revision of the order u/s 263 as directed by appropriate authority vide order dated 29-01-2021 is upheld. The appeal of the assessee in ITA No.54/Chny/2021 stand dismissed and the Tribunal’s order stand modified to that extent. The Ld. AO is directed to carry out the revisionary directions. - 4 - 6. The application stand allowed in terms of our above order. Order pronounced on 23 rd February, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा*+ / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद- / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे/ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 23-02-2024 DS आदेशकीOितिलिपअ6ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant2. यथ /Respondent 3.आयकरआयु /CIT 4.िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 5.गाड फाईल/GF