2022 (8) TMI 1522

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... intimation u/s 143(1) in respect of issues which are debatable one, i.e on which there are difference of opinions of various judicial forums, whereas AO is permitted to make adjustments while processing return only in respect of arithmetical error or incorrect claim as per law on which there is no dispute. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, CIT(A) erred in confirming action of DCIT(CPC) in making disallowance of Rs. 4,44,59,090/- by alleging that employees contribution to "Employee Provident Fund (EPF)" paid after the due date specified in the "Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952" but before the due specified u/s 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by invoking provision of section 36....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tation of total income of Rs. 2487,42,94,544/- against income assessed u/s 143(1). 5. The appellant reserves the right to add, amend or alter any ground or grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 2. Out of the above grounds, ground No.4 has not been pressed by the assessee, therefore, the ground No.4 is dismissed as not pressed. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a State Government Undertaking engaged in the business of generation of power in the State of Chhattisgarh and filed its return of income originally on 31.12.2018 through e-filing disclosing total income of Rs. Nil, showing a MAT liability of Rs. 43,33,74,802/-. Later on, the assessee filed a revised return on 30.03.2019 declaring total income of R....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the AO on account of provision for gratuity, observing that since the assessee has already disallowed and added back the said sum of Rs. 421,44,91,036/- in computation of income filed with revised return on 30.09.2019, therefore double addition is not permissible. In the result appeal was partly allowed by the CIT(A) NFAC. Now, the assessee is further appeal before the Tribunal to challenge the issues decided against it. 5. First we shall take up the legal ground raised by the assessee being ground No.1 regarding confirming the action of the DCIT(CPC) in making adjustments in intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act in respect of the issues which are debatable one, whereas the AO is permitted to make adjustment while processing the return only ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n the audit report but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return." and cannot be dislodged, therefore, this ground of the assessee is dismissed. 7. Since ground No.1 in which the legal issue raised by the ld. AR has been dismissed, therefore, we are taking the other ground on merits. 8. Ground No.2 & 3 of the appeal are taken together to adjudicate, being disallowance of employees contribution to "Employee Provident Fund (EPF)" and Employee State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) paid after the due date specified in the relevant Acts but before the due specified u/s 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by invoking provision of section 36(1)(va). 9. Ld. AR before us filed the copy of Form No.3CA and submitted that ....