आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण रायपुर (cid:586)ायपीठ रायपुर , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR (cid:373)ी रिवश सूद, (cid:586)ाियक सद(cid:735) एवं (cid:373)ी अ(cid:348)ण खोड़िपया लेखा सद(cid:735) के सम(cid:407) । , BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं / ITA No: 5/RPR/2023 .

(िनधा१रण वष१ Assessment Year: 2019-20)

M/s Varsha Construction, V The Assistant Commissioner of Income Second Floor-25, 26, Millenium Plaza, s Tax, Circle-1(1), Central Revenue Raipur-492 001, Chhattisgarh Building, Civil Lines, Raipur, C.G..

PAN: AAEFV 8399 M (अपीलाथ५/Appellant) . (ঋ(cid:529)थ५ / Respondent)

.

िनधा१ौरती की ओर से /Assessee by : Mr. Sakshi Gopal Aggarwal, CA राज(cid:738) की ओर से /Revenue by : Smt. Tarannum Verma, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 21.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/ Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER ARUN KHODPIA, AM:

The captioned appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, dated 10.11.2022, decided against the appeal of the assessee filed against the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 03.01.2021.

2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

1. CIT(A), NFAC has been erred for not condoning the delay in filing of appeal.

2. The Deputy Comm. Of Income Tax, CPC has been erred in disallowance of Rs.4,64,730/- on account ESIC payment (employee's contribution) made after the due date as specified in relevant act but before the due date of filing of return.

3. The Deputy Comm. Of Income Tax. CPC has been erred for making addition u/s 143(1) on the basis of reporting in form 3CD of tax audit report u/s 44AB and also the impugned addition is beyond the scope of section 143(1).

3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee has e-filed its return of income for the AY 2019-20 on 30.10.2019 declaring total income of Rs.1,27,98,870/-. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of building of complete constructions or parts. The return of income of the assessee was processed by CPC, Bangalore, and has issued an intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act, on 03.01.2021 and assessed the income at Rs.1,32,63,600/-. While processing the return, disallowance of Rs.4,64,728/- on account of failure of the assessee to deposit employee’s contribution to PF & ESI, which was admittedly not paid on or before the prescribed due dates u/s.36(1)((va) of the Act. Aggrieved by the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC. However, the appeal of the assessee was not considered maintainable by the Ld. CIT(A) on account of delay in filing of the appeal, wherein, the explanations of the assessee were not found, convincing and acceptable in terms of provisions of sec.249(3) of the Act. Since the assessee was unable to demonstrate that it had sufficient cause within the meaning of limitation provisions for not presenting the appeal within the period of 30 days. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) considering the same as barred by limitation.

4. Dissatisfied with the decision of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, the assessee carried the matter before the Tribunal for adjudication of the same.

5. This matter was disposed of earlier by this tribunal in favour of the assessee, vide its order dated 11.08.2023, with the following observations:

8. The issue in the present appeal that ITR filed by the assessee for AY 2019-20 was processed by the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC), Bengaluru issuing intimation U/s 143(1) of the IT Act. CPC has processed the return and has triggered the provisions of section 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the Act and has made a disallowance of Rs.4,64,730/- on account of delayed payment of employee’s contribution to ESIC under the respective statute but paid before the date of filing of return u/s.139 of IT Act. On perusal of the facts and issue in the p