Sh. Sukhdev Singh, Mohali v. ITO-Ward-6(4), Chandigarh

ITA 250/CHANDI/2021 | 2019-20
Pronouncement Date: 01-11-2021 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 25021514 RSA 2021
Assessee PAN AACCC6444M
Bench Chandigarh
Appeal Number ITA 250/CHANDI/2021
Duration Of Justice 1 month(s) 4 day(s)
Appellant Sh. Sukhdev Singh, Mohali
Respondent ITO-Ward-6(4), Chandigarh
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 01-11-2021
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Assessment Year 2019-20
Appeal Filed On 27-09-2021
Judgment Text
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरणआयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण च瀃डीगढ़ 瀈यायपीठ च瀃डीगढ़ 瀈यायपीठच瀃डीगढ़ 瀈यायपीठ च瀃डीगढ़ 瀈यायपीठ ‘ए एए ए’ च瀃डीगढ़ च瀃डीगढ़च瀃डीगढ़ च瀃डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH 炈ीमती 炈ीमती炈ीमती 炈ीमती 琈दवा 琈दवा琈दवा 琈दवा 琐सह 琐सह琐सह 琐सह 瀈याियक 瀈याियक瀈याियक 瀈याियक सद瀡य सद瀡यसद瀡य सद瀡य एवं एवंएवं एवं एवं एवंएवं एवं 炈ीमती 炈ीमती炈ीमती 炈ीमती अ玂पूणा榁 अ玂पूणा榁अ玂पूणा榁 अ玂पूणा榁 गु玅ा गु玅ागु玅ा गु玅ा लेखा लेखालेखा लेखा सद瀡य सद瀡यसद瀡य सद瀡य BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH JM & SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA AM आयकर आयकरआयकर आयकर अपील अपीलअपील अपील सं संसं सं./ ITA No. 255/CHD/2021 िनधा榁रण वष榁 िनधा榁रण वष榁िनधा榁रण वष榁 िनधा榁रण वष榁 / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/s CZAR FAUCETS LIMITED 182/69 Indl. Area Phase-1 Chandigarh. बनाम VS The DCIT CPC Bangalore. 瀡थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: AACCC6444M अपीलाथ牸/Appellant 灹瀄यथ牸/Respondent िनधा榁琇रती क琉 ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Vineet Krishan Advocate राज瀡व क琉 ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Priyanka Dhar JCIT तारीख/Date of Hearing : 02.11.2021 उदघोषणा क琉 तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 02.11.2021 VIRTUAL HEARING आदेश आदेशआदेश आदेश/ORDER PER DIVA SINGH The present appeal filed by the assessee assails the correctness of the order dated 25.08.2021 of ld. CIT(A) (NFAC i.e. National Faceless Appeal Centre) Delhi passed u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act 1961. The order is assailed on the sole issue of sustaining disallowance made for late ESI/PF payments made however before filing of the return u/s 139(1) in 2018-19 assessment year. ITA 255 /CHD/2021 A.Y. 2018-19 Page 2 of 4 2. The ld. AR Mr.Vineet Krishan inviting attention to the copy of Form No. 3CA disclosing the factual position and the order of the ITAT in the case of M/s. Jupiter Aqua Lines Pvt. Ltd vs DCIT Circle 6(1) Mohali in ITA No.83/Chd/2021 dated 27 th August 2021 submitted that the issue is fully covered in assessee's favour by virtue of the order of the ITAT and the decision of the jurisdictional High Court. Accordingly it was his prayer that the appeal of the assessee may be allowed. 3. The ld. Sr.DR considering the decisions and the record relied upon the impugned order. No contrary decision was cited by her. 4. We have heard the submissions and perused the material available on record. It is seen that in the present appeal the assessee has only assailed the disallowance sustained by the CIT(A) vide his order passed u/s 250(6) of the Act amounting to Rs. 4 52 231/- on the grounds that the ESI & PF payments were not made within time as per the relevant Statute. The claim of the assessee that the payments were made before the due date of filing of the return u/s 139(1) was held to be not relevant. It is seen that the said issue as far as the present Forum is concerned stands fully covered in favour of the assessee not only by the consistent orders of the various Benches of the ITAT namely; the order dated 03.08.2021 of ITA 255 /CHD/2021 A.Y. 2018-19 Page 3 of 4 the Delhi Benches in the case of Insta Exhibition Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT in ITA 6941/Del/2017; order dated 01.07.2021 of the Hyderabad Bench in the case of Crescent Roadways Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT in ITA No. 1952/Hyd/2018 but also consistent orders of the Chandigarh Bench. It is seen that all along the Co- ordinate Benches have held that the amendments to Sections 36(1)(va) and u/s 43B of the Income Tax Act effected by the Finance Act 2021 is applicable prospectively and not retrospectively. While coming to the said conclusion the Benches have relied upon and read from the Notes on Clauses at the time of introduction of the Finance Act 2021 and have held that the amendment is applicable in relation to the assessment year 2021-22 and subsequent years and not retrospectively. Thus in view of this legal position as considered by the Co-ordinate Benches and taking note of the decisions of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs Nuchem Limited ITA 323 of 2009 and CIT Vs Hemla Embroidery Mills Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 167 we are of the view that the additions cannot be made or sustained on the strength of the amendment effected by Finance Act 2021 to Sections 36(1)(va)/43B of the Act as the legal position thereon is very clear. The departmental stand that it is clarificatory in nature has consistently been rejected. Thus in the face of the clear legal position as set out hereinabove ITA 255 /CHD/2021 A.Y. 2018-19 Page 4 of 4 we find that the claim of the assessee is to be allowed in the year under consideration which is 2018-19 assessment year. The impugned order accordingly is set aside and the AO is directed to delete the disallowance. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. Said order was pronounced in the presence of the parties via Webex. 5. Order pronounced on 2 n d November 2021. Sd/- Sd/- ( अ玂पूणा榁 अ玂पूणा榁अ玂पूणा榁 अ玂पूणा榁 गु玅ा गु玅ागु玅ा गु玅ा ) ( 琈दवा 琈दवा琈दवा 琈दवा 琐सह 琐सह琐सह 琐सह ) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (DIVA SINGH) लेखा लेखालेखा लेखा सद瀡य सद瀡यसद瀡य सद瀡य/ Accountant Member 瀈याियक 瀈याियक瀈याियक 瀈याियक सद瀡य सद瀡यसद瀡य सद瀡य/ Judicial Member “Poonam” आदेश क琉 灹ितिलिप अ灡ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ牸/ The Appellant 2. 灹瀄यथ牸/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु猴/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु猴 (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय 灹ितिनिध आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण च瀃डीगढ़/ DR ITAT CHANDIGARH 6. गाड榁 फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar