2025 (8) TMI 955

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... depositing the employees' contribution to the provident fund. 2. The learned Additional / Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not affording reasonable opportunity to the appellant to explain its case thereby violating the principle of natural justice. 3. The learned Additional / Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in applying the Apex Court Judgment without appreciating the peculiar facts and circumstances of the appellant's case. 4. The learned Additional / Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that delay in deposit of employees contribution occurred due to the circumstances beyond the control of the appellant. 5. The Learned Additional / Joint Commissioner of Income T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....abad. 3.1. Since the assessee remained absent and did not furnish any reply on 2 opportunities provided by Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) the appeal was dismissed by Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) after following the judgement of Checkmate services (P) LTD vs CIT (2022) 143 taxmann.com 178 SC, by observing as under 4.5 Respectfully following the above view endorsed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in which the Hon'ble Court has dealt with various rulings and finally concluded the matter in favor of Revenue; the disallowance of Rs. 38,80,972/-made under Section 36(1)(va) of the Act, on account of delayed payment of Employees Contribution to PF/ESI u/s 143(1) is confirmed. The grounds of appeal are dismissed. 3.2. It is this order against which the assessee is i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... submitted before us that when no penalty was imposed in the PF act for the above said delay of one-day, observing the same, no penalty should also be imposed under the income tax act. In support of its contentions learned AR relied on various decisions passed by coordinate benches of this Tribunal, as under wherein applying the doctrine of impossibility of performance, no disallowance was made. FIL India Business & Research Services (P.) Ltd (154 taxmann.com 251)(Del) Mahesh Nemichandra Ganeshwade (32 CCH 0281) (Pune) National Aviation Co. of India (29 CCH 0807) (Mum) Jagdish Malpani (23 CCH 0574) (Indore) Anant Chetan Agarwal (54 CCH 0181) (Lucknow) Ashiana Amar Developers (46 CCH 0246) (Kol) Mahendra Rajnikant Zaveri (51 CC....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dingly the CPC made disallowance under section 36 (1)(va) of the IT act of Rs. 38,80,972/- and added the same amount to the income of the assessee. Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) decided the appeal ex- parte, since the assessee could not appear on the dates of hearing provided by Ld. Addl/JCIT(A). However the assessee claimed that he sought adjournment on 2nd hearing but the same was not considered by Ld. Addl/JCIT(A). It is the claim of the learned counsel of the assessee that Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely by relying on the judgement passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of checkmate services private limited versus CIT (supra) and not considering the grounds raised by the assessee that the EPFO himself has directed its off....