Anjali Packaging Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Kolkata, considered an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 13.08.2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2021-22.
The assessee, belonging to the State of Sikkim, filed its return of income on 05.12.2021 declaring nil income after claiming deduction of ₹78,86,852 under Section 80IE of the Act. The Central Processing Centre (CPC), Bengaluru processed the return under Section 143(1) on 02.11.2022 and disallowed the deduction under Section 80IE on the ground that Form No. 10CCB had not been filed at the time of processing. Consequently, a demand of ₹12,05,320 was raised. The assessee subsequently furnished Form No. 10CCB on 16.11.2022.
Aggrieved by the adjustment made under Section 143(1), the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the ground that Form No. 10CCB had been filed belatedly and that the delay could not be condoned by the appellate authority.
Before the Tribunal, the assessee contended that filing Form No. 10CCB was only a procedural requirement and not a mandatory condition for claiming the deduction. It was submitted that procedural requirements should be construed liberally and that a substantive statutory benefit could not be denied merely because of a technical non-compliance, particularly when the required form had subsequently been filed. The assessee relied upon a decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA No. 2326/Kol/2025 dated 19.03.2026. The Department supported the orders of the lower authorities.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had filed the return claiming deduction under Section 80IE, that the deduction had been disallowed by CPC solely due to non-filing of Form No. 10CCB at the time of processing, and that the audit report in Form No. 10CCB had subsequently been furnished. It further observed that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal only on the ground of delayed filing of Form No. 10CCB and had not recorded any other adverse finding against the assessee’s claim.
The Tribunal referred to the Coordinate Bench decision, which held that delayed filing of Form No. 10CCB could not be a ground for denying a substantive deduction. That decision had observed that filing Form No. 10CCB was a procedural requirement and that the assessee, having filed the form before processing of the return and before completion of assessment, had substantially complied with the statutory requirement. It also relied upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax, Maharashtra vs. G. M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. and the Calcutta High Court in Winro Commercial (India) Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, which held that delayed filing of Form No. 10CCB constituted a procedural lapse capable of being cured at a subsequent stage.
Following the Coordinate Bench decision and considering that the deduction under Section 80IE had been denied solely because Form No. 10CCB was filed belatedly, the Tribunal held that the delayed filing of the audit report was merely a procedural defect that could be rectified subsequently. Accordingly, it set aside the order of the CIT(A) and directed the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction under Chapter VI-A.
The appeal of the assessee was allowed. The order was pronounced in open court on 06.07.2026.
Cases Discussed
- Winro Commercial (India) Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Calcutta High Court), [2023] 457 ITR 418 (Calcutta)
- Commissioner of Income-tax, Maharashtra vs. G. M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. (Supreme Court), [2015] 376 ITR 456 (SC)
- ITA No.2326/Kol/2025 (ITAT Kolkata), dated 19.03.2026
- ITA No.930/2025 (ITAT Kolkata), Order dated 26.08.2025
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT KOLKATA
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.08.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Id. CIT(A)”) passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2021-22.
2. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant belongs to North Eastern State of Sikkim and filed its return of income for the A.Y 2021-22 on 05/12/2021 declaring total income of Rs. Nil after claiming deduction u/s 80IE of Rs.78,86,852/-. The return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 02/11/2022 by the CPC, Bengaluru, by disallowing the deduction claimed u/s 80IE for Rs.78,86,852/- and thereby raising demand of Rs.12,05,320/-. CPC while processing the return disallowed deduction u/s. 80IE for non-filing of Form No. 10CCB as it was not available at the time of processing u/s 143(1). The Appellant has subsequently filed Form No.10CCB belatedly on 16.11.2022 only.
3. Aggrieved by said order, assessee preferred appeal before the Id. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed on the ground delay in filing Form No.10CCB.
4. Being aggrieved, dissatisfied, assessee preferred appeal before us. The learned Authorized Representative (Id. AR) challenges the very impugned order thereby submitting that order passed by the Id. CIT(A) arbitrarily and contrary to the law as filing of Form 10CCB is a directory in nature not mandatory. The Id. AR further submits that it is the settled principles of law that procedural requirements must be construed liberally and substantive statutory benefit cannot be denied due to the technical non-compliance and particularly when compliance was subsequently made. The Id. AR has placed the decision of Coordinate Bench of Kolkata in ITA No.2326/Kol/2025 (A.Y. 2020-21), dated 19.03.2026.
5. Contrary to that learned Senior Departmental Representative (Id. Sr. DR) supports the impugned order of lower authorities.
6. Upon hearing the submission of the Id. AR of the representative parties and on perusal of the order, the following facts has been emerged:
i. the assessee belongs to North Eastern Stated of Sikkim, filed its return of income on 05.12.2021 after claiming deduction u/s 80IE of the Act,
ii. the AO, CPC vide processing the return, disallowed the deduction for non-filing of Form 10CCB and
iii. the assessee has subsequently filed Form 10CCB on 16.11.2022.
The Id. CIT(A) in its impugned order has dismissed the appeal of the assessee only on the sole ground that assessee submitted Form 10CCB belatedly after processing the return of income u/s 143(1) of the Act by the CPC and power to condone the delay in filing Form 10CCB is not vested with Income-tax Authorities, CIT(A) etc. In this context, we have gone through the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of Kolkata in ITA No.2326/Kol/2025 (supra), in which it has ben held that delay in filing Form 10CCB cannot be a ground to deny substantive benefit to the assessee. The relevant portion of the order is essential to reproduce hereinbelow:
“5. The Ld CITA in its impugned order has upheld the order of the CPC only on the ground that form No. 10 CCB submitted by the assessee belatedly that is on 16.11.2022 and that cannot be condoned by JCIT (Appeals),In this context, we have perused the order passed by the Coordinate Bench, Kolkata in ITA No. 930/2025 in which the issues are the same as of the present case and the relevant portion of the order is as follows:
03. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 22-122021 whereas the extended due date was 15-03-2022 The assessee filed the return of income declaring total income at Rs. nil, after claiming deduction under chapter VIA of the Act, to the tune of f2,07,41,110/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) by order dated 2-11-2022, assessing the income at Rs. 2,07,41,111/-disallowing the deduction claimed under section chapter VIA of the Act. Though, the assessee filed the return of income within due date however, the form No. 1OCCB was filed online on 17-10-2022 which is before the due date of the order under section 143(1) of the Act. Thus, the disallowance of deduction under Section 80 IE of the Act was made by the AO on the ground of non-furnishing of Form 10 CCB within due date.
04. In the appellate proceedings, the appellate authority dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee has not filed the Form No. 10 CCB within the due date and therefore, disallowance made by the AO is in accordance with the provision of Section 143(1) of the Act.
05. after hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the return of income was filed within the due date, however the Form 10 CCB was filed after the due date, but before the date of passing the order under Section 143(1) of the Act. The AO CPC disallowed the claim on the ground that since the Form No. 10 CCB was filed after the due date, therefore, assessee was not entitled to deduction under Chapter VIA of the Act, which was confirmed by Learned CIT (A). In our opinion, the act of AO (CPC) is not correct as the filing of Form 10 CCB is a procedural requirement and cannot disentitle the assessee from its claim under Chapter VIA. Nonetheless, the assessee filed the Form 10 CCB online before date of processing of return of income and passing of order under Section 143(1) of the Act. The case of the assessee finds support from the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Maharashtra vs. G. M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. [2015] 376 ITR 456 (SC), wherein the Hon. Apex Court has held that Form lOCCB filed during assessment proceedings is m sufficient compliance to deduction under u/s 80IB of the Act. This was held in the context of deduction claimed by the assessee in respect of profit and gains from industrial undertaking under Section 80-1B of the Act and the Form 10 CCB was not filed along with the return of income but was filed before the due date of filing of final assessment order, The Hon’ble Apex Court has concurred with the view of the Hon’ble High Court and held that even if Form 10 CCB was not filed along with the return but the same was filed during the assessment proceeding and before the final assessment order was made, which would amount to sufficient compliance and thus, dismissed the appeal of the revenue. Similarly, in case of the assessee also finds support from the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Winro Commercial (India) Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax [2023] 457 ITR 418 (Calcutta) dated 2211-2022, wherein the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the context of the claim of the assessee under Section 80 IA of the Act, held that audit report in Form 10 CCB which was not filed within the due date as per the Act would not disentitle the assessee from deduction under Section 80 IA of the Act. The Hon’ble High Court held that the non-filing of the audit report within the due date is a procedural lapse and could be cured in the subsequent stage. The Hon’ble High Court set aside the order passed by the Tribunal as well as the CIT (A) and directed the AO to allow the deduction as claimed under Section 80 IA of the Act. Considering the facts of the assessee’s case in the light of the above decisions, we are Inclined to set aside the order of Learned CIT (A) and direct the AO to allow the deduction under Chapter VIA by holding that the late filing of Form 10 CCB is just a procedural defect and it could be cured in the subsequent stage. Needless to state that assessee filed the audit report before the processing of the return which is in sufficient compliance. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 06. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26.08.2025.”
7. The present case in hands also reveals that claim of the assessee u/s 80IE of the Act has been denied only on the sole ground that Form 10CCB filed belatedly. There is no other finding of the order of Id. CIT(A). Keeping in view, the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench (supra) in considering the facts of the case, we allow the appeal of the assessee by setting-aside the order of Id. CIT(A) and direct the AO to allow the deduction under Chapter VI-A by holding that late filing of Form 10CCB is just a procedural defect and it can be cured in the subsequent stage.
8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.
The order is pronounced in the open Court on 06/07/2026
