Page 1 of 3 आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, इंदौर Ûयायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA No. 26/Ind/2023 (Arising out of ITA No.196/Ind/2022) Assessment Year: 2018-19 DCIT, CPC, Bangalore बनाम/ Vs. M/s.Sita Homes Pvt.Ltd., Indore. (Applicant/Revenue) (Respondent/Assessee) PAN: AAGCS5892K Assessee by Ms.Nisha Lahoti, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 06.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 06.10.2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: This Misc. Application [“M/A”] u/s 254(2) of Income-tax Act, 1961 is preferred by Revenue seeking part re-call of Order dated 12.10.2022 of ITAT, Indore Bench in ITA No.196/Ind/2022 for assessment-year 2018-19. 2. Ld. AR for assessee initially raised an objection stating that the present M/A had been filed by the Revenue after expiry of time-limit of 6 DCIT, CPC,Bangalore vs. M/s.Sita Homes P.Ltd.,Indore. MANo.26/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2018-19 Page 2 of 3 months prescribed in section 254(2). But, however, on representation of Ld. DR for revenue and on perusal of dispatch records of ITAT, Ld. AR was satisfied that the present M/A has been filed by revenue within 6 months after receipt of impugned order; hence within time. Therefore, Ld. AR fairly agreed that the present M/A filed by Revenue deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the hearing is proceeded. 3. Coming to the merits of the M/A, Ld. DR submitted that the revenue is seeking part re-call of the impugned order qua the issue of disallowance of employee’s contribution to PF/ESI paid after due date under the respective laws but before due date for filing return of income u/s 139(1). The ITAT has held as allowable deduction by following certain decisions of Hon’ble Courts favouring the assessee. Now, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has settled this controversy in the case of Checkmat Services Private Limited vs. CIT 448 ITR 518 against assessee and in favour of revenue by holding that the payment of employees’ contribution to PF / ESI after due dates under their respective laws is not allowable as deduction u/s 36(1)(va) even if the payment is made on or before due date of filing the return of income u/s 139(1). Hon'ble Supreme Court has also held that provisions of Section 43B does not cover the deduction of employees’ contribution to PF/ ESI. Therefore, in view of judgement in Checkmat Services Private Limited vs. CIT (supra), an apparent mistake has crept in the impugned order taking a view which is contrary to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hence, this is a fit situation to re-call the impugned Order passed by ITAT, Indore. We find merit in the submission of Ld. DR. Therefore, we agree to accept the present M/A and re-call the original order partly to the extent pertaining to the issue of disallowance of employees’s contribution to PF / ESI and re-store the original appeal to hear that issue. Ordered accordingly. DCIT, CPC,Bangalore vs. M/s.Sita Homes P.Ltd.,Indore. MANo.26/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2018-19 Page 3 of 3 4. The registry is directed to list original appeal for a fresh hearing on 06.11.2023. Both parties have noted next date of hearing, hence no separate intimation to parties. 5. Resultantly, this M/A is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court immediately on conclusion of hearing and subsequently reduced in writing Sd/- sd/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore Ǒदनांक /Dated : 06.10.2023. CPU/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Sr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore