Dunichand Khitri Raja Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore)
Dunichand Khitri Raja filed an appeal before the ITAT Bangalore against the disallowance of a claim for deduction under section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2019-20. The claim was rejected due to the delay in filing Form 10CCB, which the assessee attributed to technical glitches beyond their control. The appeal sought to overturn the decision and allow the claim for deduction.
The ITAT Bangalore examined the facts of the case and found that the return of income, along with the audit report in Form 3CB-3CD, was filed within the prescribed due date. However, due to technical glitches, Form 10CCB could not be uploaded on the e-filing portal of the Income Tax Department. The assessee made efforts to resolve the issue with the helpdesk but faced delays in resolving the technical glitches. Eventually, Form 10CCB was filed with a delay of eleven days. The ITAT referred to a similar case decided by the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal and held that the delay in filing Form 10CCB should not bar the claim of deduction under section 80-IA.
The ITAT Bangalore allowed the appeal of Dunichand Khitri Raja and directed the re-adjudication of the claim for deduction under section 80-IA. The ITAT emphasized that the delay in filing Form 10CCB, caused by technical glitches beyond the assessee’s control, should not be a reason to reject the claim.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against order of CIT(A), dated 16.03.2023, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2019-20.
2. The solitary issue that is raised is whether the CIT(A) is justified in confirming the disallowance of claim of deduction under section 80-IA of the Act, amounting to Rs.2,43,586/-.
3. Brief facts of the case are as follows:
For the Assessment Year 2019-20, the return of income was filed on 13.09.2019 declaring total taxable income at Rs.53,42,300/-. Assessee had claimed deduction under section 80-IA of the Act, with respect to a windmill amounting to Rs.2,43,586/-. Assessee received an intimation under section 143(1) of the Act, on 02.06.2020, wherein an amount of Rs.2,43,586/- claimed as deduction under section 80-IA of the Act was not granted for the reason that Form 10CCB was not filed within the time prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act.
4. Aggrieved by the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act denying the benefit of deduction under section 80-IA of the Act, assessee preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The CIT(A) confirmed the view taken in the intimation passed under section 143(1) of the Act. The relevant finding of the CIT(A) reads as follows:
“Considering the facts that appellant has not filed the Form no. 10CCB within the stipulated date mentioned in the Income Tax Act (i.e. To be filed within the date prescribed for filing of Income tax Return u/s 139(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961) in spite of it, the appellant has claimed the deduction u/s 80IA.
I concur with the addition/disallowance made by the CPC, on the above issue amounting to Rs. 2,43,586/-. Hence, appeal of the appellant is dismissed.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.”
5. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The grounds raised read as follows:
1. General Ground
1.1 The learned Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru (‘A O’) erred in passing the intimation under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act’) in the manner passed by him and the Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (OT(A)) has erred in confirming the said assessment order. The assessment order so passed is bad in law and liable to be quashed.
