TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 786X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f disallowance under Section 40A(7) of the Act which is in consonance with limited scrutiny assessment. Therefore, ground no.1 is dismissed. Disallowance u/s 36(1)(va), addition u/s 37 and addition under other sources - The said disallowances were made as per order dated 13.11.2019 which is intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act and the same was not challenged by the assessee before the CIT(A) as well as before the Tribunal. This amounts to acceptance of the disallowance on the intimation under Section 143(1) itself and the same cannot be taken at this juncture as the appealable order has not commented on the said disallowance or not given any reasons on the said disallowances. It is merely mentioning the earlier disallowances. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IONS OF RS.4,40,100/- TO RETURNED INCOME 2.01 On the facts and circumstances of appellant s case as well as in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming erroneous action of ld. AO of making total additions of Rs.4,32,177/- on account of late deposit of employees contribution towards PF ESIC without appreciating fact that contributions were deposited on due date only but due to server error date of credit on Chillan is 16 th . Further CIT(A) had failed to appreciate fact that amendment brought in section 36 43B by Finance Act, 2021 is prospective and not retrospective . 2.02 Your appellant further submits that the ld CIT(A) failed to give his verdict in respect of additions of Rs.1,222/- under section 37 of the Act a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Section 143(1) of the Act and as per the said intimation the disallowance under Section 36(1)(va) and disallowance under Section 37 as well as other sources were made by the Assessing Officer. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 13.08.2020, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. There is a delay of 14 days in filing the present appeal for which the assessee has filed the delay condonation application thereby stating the reasons for delay due to pandemic. Thus, the delay is condoned . 6. The Ld. AR submitted that in respect of ground no.1 that assessee s case was selected for limited scrutiny by issuance of notice dated 28.09.2019 under Section 143 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ches date of credit in the challan appears to be 16 th i.e. next date. Thus, perusal of above referred challan makes the following aspects clear in relation to the controversy on hand: date of presentation 15.08.2017, date of realisation 15.08.2017 date of credit 16.08.2017. The Ld. AR submitted that the aforesaid arguments were categorically raised before the CIT(A) but the CIT(A) has conveniently chosen not to comment on the same which implies that he has nothing in rebuttal to such factual aspects. It is well settled legal position that when cheque is not dishonoured but is encashed, payment relates back to the date of receipt of cheque and in law, the date of payment will be the date of delivery of cheque. The Ld. AR relied upon the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able in the year under consideration since block of assets concerned has not been deleted so far. Under such circumstances, the impugned addition deserves to be deleted in the larger interest of justice. In view of the above, the Ld. AR submitted that the impugned additions should be deleted. 7. The ld. DR submitted that the assessment order date 13.08.2020 is restricted only to the limited scrutiny issue and the Assessing Officer has not travelled beyond the issue selected for limited scrutiny assessment. Therefore, ground no.1 deserves to be dismissed. In respect of disallowance/addition of other sources under Section 36(1)(va) and under Section 37, the Ld. DR submitted that these disallowances was as per intimation under Section 143(1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
