2023 (5) TMI 949 - AT - Income Tax

Validity of intimation issued u/s 143(1) - disallowance towards employees contribution of Provident Fund (PF) and Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) u/s 36(1)(va) - HELD THAT - Undisputedly disallowance was made by the AO/CPC while processing the return of income filed by the assessee, under section 143(1) - Also not in dispute that no notice has been issued by the AO/CPC before making disallowance u/s 143(1) - It is also not in dispute that the assessee has also filed the rectification application under section 154 of the Act before the AO which was also dismissed. When we examine the impugned order passed by the CIT(A) it shows that no notice has been issued to the assessee before passing impugned order rather a vague reference in para 1 of the impugned order that statutory notice under section 250 of the Act was issued online to the assessee is given. No date has been given on which date the notice was issued and for which date the assessee was called upon to appear. No doubt the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order on merits but it is fundamental principle of rule of natural justice that before passing any order the assessee must be given adequate opportunity of being heard. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
The issues involved in the judgment are the condonation of delay in filing the appeal, validity of intimation under section 143(1) of the Act, opportunity of hearing, violation of principles of natural justice, disallowance of employees' contribution to provident funds and ESIC, levy of interest, and general grounds for appeal.

Condonation of Delay:
The appellant, M/s. Lasons India Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal with a delay of 4 days and sought condonation of the delay. The delay was attributed to an employee who failed to forward the necessary papers to the tax consultant on time. The delay was condoned based on the principle of substantial justice prevailing over technical considerations.

Validity of Intimation under Section 143(1):
The appellant challenged the validity of the intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Act, alleging that it was contrary to the conditions laid down. The appeal sought to treat the intimation as ab-initio void, invalid, illegal, and bad in law.

Opportunity of Hearing:
The appellant contended that the intimation under section 143(1) and the rectification order under section 154 of the Act were passed without giving any opportunity for a hearing. The appeal requested that these actions be deemed ab-initio void, invalid, illegal, and annulled.

Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The appellant argued that the intimation and rectification order were issued in violation of the principles of natural justice. It was claimed that these actions were void, invalid, illegal, and should be annulled due to the lack of adherence to natural justice principles.

Disallowance of Employees' Contribution:
The appellant disputed the disallowance of Rs. 81,11,823/- for employees' contribution to PF and ESIC, alleging that the lower authorities did not consider the submissions made by the appellant. The appeal sought the deletion of the disallowance.

Levy of Interest:
The appellant challenged the levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Act. It was argued that the AO erred in levying interest, and the appeal requested the deletion of the interest or direction for its levy in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

General Grounds for Appeal:
The appellant reserved the right to add, alter, amend, or vary the grounds of appeal. The judgment highlighted the importance of providing an opportunity for a hearing before passing orders and emphasized the need for adherence to natural justice principles in legal proceedings.