2023 (8) TMI 762

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....year 2019-20. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: "1. That under the facts and the law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi erred in making disallowance by way of adjustment of Rs. 80,289/- u/s 43B made by AO CPC in intimation u/s 143(1) for non- payment of GST which was erroneously mentioned by the auditor in form 3CD Report in Column No. 26(i)(B)(a) in as against column just to above column, as the same was paid on 26.06.2019 & 20.09.2019. Prayed that the provisions of Sec - 43B are not applicable and disallowance of Rs. 80,289/-be deleted. 2. That under the facts and the law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi further erred in not admitt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reporting by the auditor in his audit report filed u/s. 44AB of the Act that GST payable of Rs. 80,289/- was not paid on or before the "due date" of furnishing return of income prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act, the assessee had failed to make disallowance of the said amount while computing its income for the year under consideration. 8. As is discernible from the records the auditor of the assessee had in his "audit report" reported at Sr. No. 26, as under: 26. (i)(b)(a) Paid on or before the due date for furnishing the return of income of the previous year under section 139(1)   Section Nature of liability Amount Nil 26. (i)(B)(b) Not paid on or before the aforesaid date       Section Natur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ore the aforesaid date. Elaborating on the reasons leading to the aforesaid mistake, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that the same had occasioned for the reason that the auditor had wrongly shuffled the relevant reporting at Sr. No. 26(1)(B)(a) as against those at Sr. No. 26(1)(B)(b). In sum and substance, it was the claim of the Ld. AR that the auditor instead of reporting that the GST of Rs. 80,289/- (supra) that was shown as payable in the assessee's balance sheet on 31.03.2019 was paid before the "due date" for furnishing return of income for the year under consideration u/s. 139(1) of the Act, had in spite of making a reference of the said amount in Column "a" had wrongly made reference of the same in Column "b". The Ld. AR in order to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issue, I find that it is a matter of fact borne from record that the assessee had before the due date of filing of his return of income for the year under consideration deposited an amount of GST of Rs. 80,289/- that was shown as payable in his "balance sheet" on 31.03.2019. The aforesaid factual position is substantiated on a perusal of the revised audit report of the assessee u/s. 44AB of the Act dated 25.02.2023; "affidavit filed by the assessee dated 04.03.2021 as was filed before the CIT(Appeals); and copy of the GST payable account for the immediately succeeding year i.e. A.Y.2019-20. Apart from that, I find from a perusal of the return of income as had been filed in the course of the proceedings before me that he had therein categori....