ITO-42(1)(2), MUMBAI V. JASBIR SINGH KABERWAL, MUMBAI

MA 290/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Income Tax Department's Miscellaneous Applications against the Tribunal's earlier decision which allowed the assessee's claim for deductions related to employee contributions to PF/ESIC. The Tribunal had previously permitted these deductions if the payments were made before the due date of filing the income tax return under section 139(1) of the Act. However, following the Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, which mandated adherence to the statutory due dates for such contributions, the Tribunal recalled its earlier order and directed the matter to be re-heard.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 299241 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 10-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 05-04-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Daryapur Shetkari Sahakari Ginning and Pressing Factory v. ACIT [2021] 123 taxmann.com 301 (Bombay), Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT-1448 ITR 518
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PRIYAL V
• Section: 139(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI BR BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM MA. Nos. 290/Mum/2023 & 342/Mum/2023 (Arising out of ITA. Nos.1787/Mum/2021 & 1788/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2019-20) ITO-42(1)(2) Kautilya Bhavan, Room No. 745, BKC, Bandra East, Mumbai-400050. बिधम/ Vs. Jasbir Singh Kaberwal 204, B-III, Blue Galaxy, C.S. Road, Dahisar (East), Mumbai-400068. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AGVPK8060F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 11/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 31/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: These are Miscellaneous applications preferred by the revenue against the order of this Tribunal in ITA. Nos.1787 & 1788/Mum/2021 dated 30.08.2022 for AY. 2019-20. 2. The revenue submitted that Tribunal in ITA Nos. 1787 & 1788/Mum/2021 for AY. 2019-20 has allowed the claim of the assessee with respect to deduction pertaining to amount deposited in the relevant fund towards Employee’s contribution to PF/ESIC beyond the due date for payment as specified in the PE/ESIC Act, but paid before the due date of filing return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. And the Department has preferred this MA against the impugned action of Tribunal. At the outset, it is noted that the Department received the impugned order of Tribunal on 23.11.2022 as evident from the date-stamp affixed on the copy of impugned order of this Tribunal, and since there is no other evidence to take a contrary view Assessee by: Shri Vipul J. Shah & Ms. Priyal V. Shah Revenue by: Ms. Mahita Nair MA. Nos.290 & 342/Mum/2023 A.Y. 2019-20 Jasbir Singh Kaberwal 2 regarding date of receipt of impugned order, we note that Department has filed the miscellaneous applications in this registry on 06.04.2023 which is within six (6) months of receipt of the impugned order of the Tribunal. So, we admit the MA being filed within the limitation period, and for doing that, we rely on decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Daryapur Shetkari Sahakari Ginning and Pressing Factory v. ACIT [2021] 123 taxmann.com 301 (Bombay). Proceeding further, we note that MA has been preferred to recall the impugned order in the light of Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT-1448 ITR 518 which has set at rest the controversy wherein it was held that employer/assessee’s have to deposit the employee’s contribution towards PF/ESIC on or before the due date prescribed in the respective law [PF/ESIC Acts] for availing the deduction u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act. Considering the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court as referred above, and the fact and issue involved in our impugned order, we recall the same accordingly and direct registry to fix appeals in due course. 3. In the result, Miscellaneous application filed by the revenue is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 31/08/2023. Sd/- Sd/- (BR BASKARAN) (ABY T. VARKEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER मुुंबई Mumbai; दिनाुंक Dated : 31/08/2023. Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) MA. Nos.290 & 342/Mum/2023 A.Y. 2019-20 Jasbir Singh Kaberwal 3 आदेश की प्रनिनलनि अग्रेनर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER, सत्यादपत प्रदत //True Copy// उि/सहधयक िंजीकधर /(Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीलीय अनर्करण, मुुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. दवभागीय प्रदतदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, मुुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.