CIT(A) (NFAC)- Delhi, Delhi V. JAGDAMBA SERVICE SOLUTION PVT LTD, MUMBAI

MA 54/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case revolves around the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's earlier decision in ITA No. 913/Mum/2022, which allowed the deduction of employee's contributions to PF/ESIC that were deposited after the statutory due date but before the due date for filing the income tax return. The revenue filed a miscellaneous application seeking to recall this decision, citing the Supreme Court's ruling in Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT-1, which clarified that such contributions must be deposited by the statutory due date to be eligible for deductions. The Tribunal admitted the application, acknowledging it was filed within the permissible time frame and based on a significant Supreme Court decision that altered the legal landscape regarding the timing of such contributions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 123920 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-06-2023
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 17-01-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT-1 448 ITR 518, Daryapur Shetkari Sahakari Ginning and Pressing Factory v. ACIT [2021] 123 taxmann.com 301 (Bombay)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ANUSIJ S. NAIR
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Time period of passing order
• Section: 139(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI ‘B’ BENCH, MUMBAI. Before Shri B. R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Aby T. Varkey (JM) M.A. No. 54/Mum/2023 I.T.A. No. 913/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2018-19) ITO-12(3)(1) Room No. 145, 1 st Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai- 400020. Vs. M/s. Jagdamba Services Solution Pvt. Ltd. 1005, Corporate Annexe Near Udyog Bhavan, Sonawala Lane, Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400063. PAN:AADCJ0686K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Anusij S. Nair Department by Ms Richa Gulati Date of He aring 09/06/2023 Date of P ronounceme nt 01/08/2023 O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey (JM) :- By preferring Miscellaneous application no. 54/Mum/2023, the revenue seeks to recall the order of the ITAT passed in ITA No. 913/Mum/2022 dated 30.06.2022. 2. The revenue submitted that Tribunal in ITA No. 913/Mum/2022 for AY. 2018-19 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 the MA against the impugned action of Tribunal. At the outset, it is noted that the Department received the impugned order of Tribunal on 20.09.2022 as evident from the date stamp M.A. No.54/Mum/2023 A.Y. 2018-19 M/s. Jagdamba Services Solutions Pvt. Ltd. 2 affixed on the copy of order of this Tribunal received by its PCIT office, and since there is no other evidence to take a contrary view regarding date of receipt of impugned order, we note that Department has filed the miscellaneous application in this registry on 18.01.2023 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-1 448 ITR 518 which has set at rest the controversy wherein it was held that employer/assessee 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. 3. In the result, the miscellaneous application filed by the revenue is allowed. Pronounced in the open court on 01/08/2023 Sd/- Sd/- (B. R. BASKARAN) (ABY T. VARKEY) Accountant Member Judicial Member Mumbai; Dated : 01/08/2023. Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) M.A. No.54/Mum/2023 A.Y. 2018-19 M/s. Jagdamba Services Solutions Pvt. Ltd. 3 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard File. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai