Skip to main content

Sanjiv Prakashan vs. ACIT

Case No: ITA No. 09/JPR/2023
Court: INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “B” JAIPUR
Date: 9/9/2024

Parties Involved

appellantSanjiv Prakashan
respondentACIT, Circle-01, Jaipur

Facts Summary

The assessee, Sanjiv Prakashan, is engaged in the business of educational publication. For the assessment year 2020-21, the assessee filed a return of income admitting a total income of Rs. 5,41,03,200/-. The Assessing Officer assessed the income at Rs. 5,61,08,400/- after making a disallowance of Rs. 16,46,879/- under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act due to the late deposit of employees' contributions to Provident Fund (PF) and Employee State Insurance (ESI). The assessee claimed that the contributions were deposited in the government account before filing the return of income. The assessee appealed against the order of the National Faceless Assessment Center, which was dismissed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The assessee then filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

Decision in favour of

Assessee

Legal Issues

  • 1. Whether the order of the learned CPC under section 143(1) and the learned CIT(A) are bad in law and against the facts of the case.
  • 2. Whether the learned AO has erred in disallowing a sum of Rs. 16,46,879/- under section 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) and the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the said disallowance.
  • 3. Whether the learned AO/CPC has erred in making adjustments under section 143(1) without giving intimation to the assessee of such adjustments, either in writing or in electronic mode, as per requirement of proviso to section 143(1), which makes the entire order of the learned AO/CPC bad in law and void ab initio.
  • 4. Whether the learned AO/CPC has erred in making adjustments under section 143(1) of Income Tax Act for Employees Contribution for PF & ESI which are not covered by permissible adjustments under section 143(1)(a) of Income Tax Act, therefore, the adjustments so made are bad in law and should be deleted.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

5 precedents cited in this judgement.

Opakhya LogoOpakhya

AI-powered tax-litigation platform. Find precedents using natural language, draft submissions in minutes, and run your entire case repository from a single secure workspace.

© 2025 Opakhya. All rights reserved.

Core Features

Additional Features

  • Smart Comments
  • Export Options
  • Quick Copy
  • Analytics Dashboard
Version 2.0.1Last updated: October 2025
Powered by AI & Machine Learning
Sanjiv Prakashan vs. ACIT | ITA No. 09/JPR/2023 | 2024 | Opakhya