9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (7) TMI 55 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance for late depositing of employee s contribution of Provident Fund and ESI - adjustment u/s 143(1) - HELD THAT - We note that the issue involved in the present appeal of assessee is covered against the assessee as the assessee has not deposited Employees Provident Fund (EPF) with the prescribed authority within stipulated time therefore as per the judgment of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Gujarat State Road Transport Company ( 2014 (1) TMI 502 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT the issue had already been decided against assessee. As against the order of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court the SLP has been filed by the assessee which has not been adjudicated yet therefore we are of the view that the issue may be remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the matter after taking into account the SLP filed by assessee (supra) before the Hon ble Supreme Court as and when will be passed by the Hon ble Supreme Court. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Issues Involved:
Appeal against assessment order for AY 2018-19 - Disallowance of late deposit of employee's contribution of Provident Fund and ESI - Ambit of section 143(1) adjustments - Request for remittance based on Supreme Court order. Analysis: 1. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2018-19 and challenges the order by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer for late deposit of employee's contribution of Provident Fund and ESI under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant contests the adjustment, arguing it does not fall within the scope of section 143(1)(a)(i) to 143(1)(a)(vi) of the Act. 2. The appellant's counsel contends that the matter should be reconsidered by the CIT(A) in light of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in a related case against the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. The Senior Departmental Representative argues that the issue is settled against the appellant based on the Gujarat High Court's decision in a similar case involving late EPF deposit. 3. The Tribunal notes that the issue is indeed covered against the appellant as per the Gujarat High Court's ruling. However, a co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Ahmedabad, in a different case, remitted a similar issue back to the CIT(A) pending the outcome of the Supreme Court judgment. The Tribunal decides to set aside the matter for the CIT(A) to reconsider in light of the Supreme Court's future ruling. 4. Referring to the Gujarat High Court's recent judgment allowing avenues for appellants to benefit from a Supreme Court decision, the Tribunal dismisses the appeal but provides the appellant with the option to revive it within three months of the Supreme Court's judgment if it overturns the High Court's decision. 5. Considering the pending SLP filed by the appellant against the jurisdictional High Court's order, the Tribunal opts to dismiss the appeal at this stage. However, if the Supreme Court reverses the High Court's decision, the appellant can revive the appeal within three months of the Supreme Court's judgment. 6. Ultimately, the Tribunal allows the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the need to await the Supreme Court's decision before final resolution of the matter. This detailed analysis of the judgment covers the issues raised, the arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's decision based on legal precedents and pending Supreme Court rulings.
|
