Shakti Polyweave Private Limited Vs PCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
The assessee challenged the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-3’s revision order dated 27.02.2026 passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act for A.Y. 2022-23. The assessee had filed its return on 21.10.2022 declaring total income of Rs.78,98,64,550 and claimed a deduction of Rs.1,01,50,833 under Section 80JJAA. The PCIT noted that Form 10DA/tax audit report under Section 44AB was due on 30.09.2022 but was filed on 20.10.2022. He therefore held that the deduction was inadmissible due to delayed filing and considered the assessment order under Section 143(3) erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue.
Before the ITAT, the assessee submitted that Form 10DA, though filed late, was available before the return was filed and was also available to the Assessing Officer before assessment proceedings commenced. The assessee relied on Analytix Business Solution (I) Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, Sunrise Ind. (India) Ltd. vs DCIT, and Metro Brands Ltd. vs. DCIT. The Tribunal noted that the Departmental Representative had not cited any distinguishing case laws.
It observed that the claim concerned deduction under Section 80JJAA and not exemption under Section 10, and stated that deduction cannot be denied merely for delayed filing of the tax audit report where it is available on record at the time of processing the return or framing the assessment. The ITAT held that the Assessing Officer’s order could not be considered erroneous and quashed the PCIT’s revision order under Section 263. The assessee’s appeal was allowed.
Cases Discussed
- Analytix Business Solution (I) Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad), 2025 (7) TMI 960 (ITAT, Ahmedabad)
- Sunrise Ind. (India) Ltd. vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad), 2025 (6) TMI 2024 (ITAT, Ahmedabad)
- Metro Brands Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai), 2025 (6) TMI 2075 (ITA, Mumbai)
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the revision order of the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-3, (hereinafter referred to as “PCIT”), dated 27.02.2026 passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2022-23.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2022-23 on 21.10.2022 declaring total income at Rs.78,98,64,550/- after claiming deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act of Rs.1,01,50,833/-. The Ld. PCIT noted that the due date for filing of Form 10DA / tax audit report u/s 44AB of the Act was 30.09.2022, whereas, the Form 10DA was filed by the assessee on 20.10.2022 i.e. after due date of filing of tax audit report. The Ld. PCIT observed that the assessee had claimed deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act of Rs.1,01,50,833/- being 30% of the total cost of additional employees employed during the year and previous two years. He observed that according to sub-section (2) of Section 80JJAA of the Act, the deduction of Rs.1,01,50,833/- was not allowable on account of delay in filing the Form 10DA. He, therefore, held that the order passed by the Assessing Officer (in short ‘the AO’) u/s 143(3) of the Act was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue as the AO had allowed the claim of deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act, which was not admissible due to delay in filing tax audit report / Form 10DA. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. PCIT, the assessee has come in appeal before us.
3. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that though there was a delay in filing the Form 10DA, however, the same was filed before filing of return of income. That the said Form 10DA was available to the AO, even before the start of assessment proceedings. The Ld. Counsel, in this respect, has relied upon the following case laws to stress the point that though, the filing of the tax audit report in Form 10DA is mandatory condition for claiming of deduction, however, the delay in filing the tax audit report is not fatal so as to deny the claim of deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act, if the same is made available to the AO at the time of processing of the return of income or at the time of framing of the assessment:
i. Analytix Business Solution (I) Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, 2025 (7) TMI 960 (ITAT, Ahmedabad)
ii. Sunrise Ind. (India) Ltd. vs DCIT, 2025 (6) TMI 2024 (ITAT, Ahmedabad)
iii. Metro Brands Ltd. vs. DCIT, 2025 (6) TMI 2075 (ITA, Mumb ai)
4. The Ld. DR has not cited any distinguishing case laws. The case of the assessee is of claim of deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act and not of claim of exemption u/s 10 of the Act. It has been held time and again by the various Courts of law that the deduction cannot be denied to an assessee for delay in filing the tax audit report, if the same is otherwise available on record at the time of processing of a return of income or framing of the assessment. The order of the AO, thus, cannot be said to be erroneous in this case.
Therefore, exercise of revision jurisdiction by the Ld. PCIT in this case is bad in law. Consequently, the revision order passed by the Ld. PCIT u/s 263 of the Act is, hereby, quashed.
5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed.
This Order pronounced on 13/07/2026 under Rule 34(4) of the ITAT Rules
