TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 1852
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n together for passing the appellate order. Accordingly, ITA No. 208/CHD/2021 for assessment year 2019-20 is being taken as a lead case. 2. Appeal in this case has been filed against the order dated 31.07.2021 passed by the ld. CIT(A) NFAC Delhi for assessment year 2019-20. 3. Grounds of appeal in all the three ITA Nos. mentioned above are as under: "1. This appeal is being filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter called as Ld. CIT(A)) on 31.07.2021 vide order/ DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1034557817(1) for A.Y. 2019-20: a. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in disallowing the appeal of the assessee by taking the plea of latest amen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appellant also filed revised Form 36 by rectifying the clerical mistakes. 5. That the appeal was filed by the previous counsel of the appellant before the Hon'ble ITAT by filing the challan towards appeal fees of Rs. 1,000/- instead of Rs. 10,000/- as he was unaware about the fees to be deposited for filing the appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT, though the said appeal was filed within a time period of 60 days from receipt of appellate order. When the above mistake came to our knowledge, we immediately rectified the mistake on the same day of our appointment. The above mistake was totally unintentional and bona-fide on the part of the appellant. Therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant deserves to be treated to have been ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fund set up under ESI Act or any other fund for the welfare of employees to the extent not credited to the employees on or before the due date under relevant act. 4. In the instant case the amount of Rs. 13759567/- related to employees contribution to the provident fund and ESI which was paid by the assessee subsequent to the due date prescribed under the relevant PF and ESI Act." 8. The counsel of the assessee has filed written submissions during proceedings before us which is reproduced as under: "The appellant is into the business of manpower supply and recruitment since 2006. Appellant had e filed the ITR on 31.10.2019 and the due date of which was 31.10.2019 u/s 139, declaring income of Rs. 2,72,27,495/-. During th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of ITR. Their other judicial pronouncement also which are in our favor: a. Hon'ble Supreme Court (2017) in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, Jaipur versus m/s Rajasthan State Beverages Corpn. Ltd. b. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Vinay Cement Ltd. (2007) 213 CTR (SC) 268 c. Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court (2015) in the case of CIT Faridabad Vs Lakhani Rubber Udyog Pvt Ltd. d. Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Hemla Embroidery Mills (P) Ltd an 27 November, 2012 (ITA No. 16 of 2009), e. Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT VS M/s Nipso Polyfabriks Ltd., (ITA 73 of 2018), f. Hon&....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s have been wrongly stamped. 3. The counsel also argued that there were delay which were beyond the control of the assessee. 10. We have considered the arguments of the counsel. The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 11. We have considered the findings given by the A.O. (CPC) and the ld. CIT(A) in his appellate order, the ld. CIT(A) has given his findings as under: "The facts of the case suggest that there is a delay in deposit of employee PF and ESIC, beyond the respective statutory due dates. There is no controversy on this finding and the appellant also accepts the delay. Hon. Supreme Court in their landmark decision in CIVIL APPEAL NO, 2833 OF 2016 CHECKMATE SERVICES P.LTD, & ORS. vs. COMMISSI....