Skip to main content

SMT Systems LLP vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

Case No: I.T.A.No.1247/PUN./2024
Court: INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE
Date: 27 Sep 2024

Parties Involved

appellantSMT Systems LLP
respondentThe Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax

Facts Summary

The assessee, SMT Systems LLP, appealed against the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for delay in depositing Employees Contribution to ESIC. The assessee argued that the addition was erroneous and not permissible under section 143(1) of the Act. The assessee also claimed that the intimation issued under section 143(1) was bad in law and that the CIT (Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the merits of the case. The assessee requested an opportunity to be heard on the merits of the case before the CIT Appeal.

Decision in favour of

Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue

Legal Issues

  • 1. The learned AO erred in making addition of Rs.1,34,087/- towards delay in deposit of Employees Contribution to ESIC under section 36(1)(va) and the learned CIT Appeals erred in confirming the same.
  • 2. The learned AO has erred in making addition towards delay in deposit of Employees Contribution to ESIC and in treating the same as taxable business income of assessee without considering assessee's submission and the learned CIT Appeals has erred in confirming the same.
  • 3. The addition has been made/confirmed without considering the relevant applicable judgments of appellate forum.
  • 4. The intimation has made certain adjustments which are not permissible under section 143(1) of the Act, therefore intimation issued under section 143(1) is bad in law and the adjustment is beyond jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer.
  • 5. There is error in computation of tax liability by CPC which is prayed to be corrected.
  • 6. The CIT (Appeals) has erred in dismissing assessee's appeal by not condoning delay in filing of appeal.

1 further legal issue analysed in the full judgement.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue.

Precedents Relied Upon

2 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