Case Law Details
Pravin Malshi Shah Vs Circle-23(1) (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT held that if there is any incorrect claim apparent from any information in the return, then adjustment is permissible. Here in this case, once the claim of deduction as per the law in not allowable, same can be disallowed in the intimation u/s 143(1). The judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court is a law, which has to be interpreted that this was the position of law from the date of enactment of provision. Further, clause (iv) states that, if any disallowance of expenditure has been indicated in the audit report, but not taken into account in computing the total income in the return, same also can be adjusted. The auditor in the audit report specifies the due date as prescribed u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act and the date on which deposit has been made, then in the computation of income, the same cannot be claimed as deduction, because the law envisages that such payment is disallowable, because it has not been paid within the due date.
ITAT hold that such an adjustment is permissible under the scope of section 143(1) of the Act. However, the adjustment has to be to the extent of employees’ contribution. Therefore, Assessing Officer is directed to restrict the disallowance to the extent of employee contribution i.e., ₹.6,74,509/-
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
1. These appeals are filed by the assessee against different orders of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 21.12.2022 and 10.11.2022 for the A.Ys. 2018-19 and 2019-20 respectively.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
