Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (8) TMI 1147 - ITAT CHENNAI

2015 (8) TMI 1147 - ITAT CHENNAI - [2015] 40 ITR (Trib) 316 (ITAT [Chen]) - Entitlement to deduction under section 80-IB - Held that:- Since the assessee had filed the return of income belatedly on September 20, 2010, the assessee was not entitled for deduction under section 80-IB of the Act. The assessee has made a plea before us, that there was an error in filling e-return of income which is too technical is to be ignored. In our opinion, this was considered by the Tribunal on the earlier occa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e cannot say that claim for granting deduction under section 80-IB was unjustly rejected by the Assessing Officer. The assessee had preferred no such claim in its return at all. This seems to be the right decision taken by the Assessing Officer. - Decided against assessee. - I.T.A. No.82 /Mds/2015, I.T.A. No.83 /Mds/2015 - Dated:- 1-5-2015 - SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri. G. Gopalan, Retd JCIT & Shri. T. Vasu, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri. S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to disallowing the claim of deduction under section 80-IB(10) of the Act. Since the issue is common in nature in both appeals, we consider the facts as narrated in I. T. A. No. 82/Mds/2015 for adjudication. 3. In this case, the original return of income in ITR†4 for the assessment year 2010-11 was filed electronically by the assessee on September 20, 2010 vide e-filing acknowledgment No. 156323040200910. The return was processed under section 143(1) by the CPC, Bangalore on March 12 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

als)-I, Chennai, who vide his order in I. T. A. No. 84/11-12 dated August 3, 2012, allowed the appeal of the assessee. The Department preferred an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal vide its order in I. T. A No. 1997/Mds/2012 dated February 7, 2013 dismissed the appeal of the Revenue after it was pointed out that vide order under section 154 dated October 16, 2012, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Chennai rectified his ord .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

inst this, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. The learned authorised representative submitted that for the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee's turnover in respect of 80-IB project is ₹ 7,08,79,942. Statutory audit report in Forms 3CB and 3CD were obtained from auditor Thiru. V. Kalyanakrishnan, partner, M/s. Suchitra and Co., Membership No. 24338, vide report dated September 20, 2010. The last date for filing of return for the assessment year is September 30, 2010, in view of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; 5,41,12,425 44AB, Forms 3CB and 3CD dated September 20, 2010 were filed. Therefore, the last date for filing the return of income is September 30, 2010, the return of income is filed on September 24, 2010, which is well within the time limit under section 139(1). The Department counsel argued that the assessee did not claim deduction under section 80-IB(10) under Chapter VI-A in the computation of total income. As revealed from the copy of electronically filed e-return in Form ITR-4 downloaded .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ip;.. No" In page 16 Part-B-Computation of total income column 11 reads as under : Deduction under Chapter VI-A (S of Schedule VI-A . . .) ₹ 1,00,000. In column 16 of page 18, the e-filing acknowledgment No. is given, which tallies with the copy of the e-filed return purportedly filed by the assessee. Perusal of the downloaded version of the e-filed return shows that the purported deduction under section 80-IB of ₹ 3,83,50,966 was never claimed by the assessee. Moreover, the ass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The extended due date for filing the return of income for individuals who are not required to get their accounts audited for the relevant assessment year was August 4, 2010. The return of income was filed only on September 20, 2010. In this respect, he drew our attention to the provisions of section 80AC of the Income-tax Act,1961 as are applicable to the facts of the case. 6. In rejoinder, the authorised representative for the assessee submitted that the lear .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r section 154. It is submitted that after the order under section 143(3) that a claim under Chapter VI is evident in several places in the return of income as could be seen from the downloaded return of income. 7. We have heard both parties and perused the material on record. In this case, filing of return of income as seen from the records the return in Form ITR-4 reads as under : 8. It was mentioned that the assessee is not liable to maintain accounts as per section 44AA of the Act. As seen fr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al, who is not required to get her accounts audited is under legal obligation to file her return of income within due date by virtue of section 139(1) of the Act for the assessment year under consideration. In this case there is extended due date for filing the return of income for "individual" as the assessee is not required to get her accounts audited for the impugned assessment year and due date for filing the return of income was August 4, 2010. The assessee has filed return of inc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d to him unless he furnishes a return of his income for such assessment year on or before the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139. In the instant case, the extended due date was August 4, 2010 and the return was filed belatedly on _September 20, 2010. As per the provisions of section 80AC, the assessee, in order to avail of the benefits of deduction under section Chapter VI-A is required, as per law, to file the return of income within the due date. This has not been done and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the findings in the assessee's own case for this assessment year in I. T. A. No. 1997/Mds/2012 which is staring at the assessee wherein it observed that reading of the print out of the e-return of the assessee clearly show that there was an attempt to mislead the Department. The assessee after working out tax dues, showed taxes paid as 1,38,84,356 when the total even as per the assessee's figure itself ought to have been more. We find that the Tribunal in the first round of litigation in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

essee was ₹ 8,98,13,395. Against the column for showing deduction under Chapter VI-A, the assessee gave the figure of ₹ 1,00,000. However, in the column showing the total income of ₹ 5,13,62,429 was shown. A reading of the print out of the e-return of the assessee clearly show that there was an attempt to mislead the Department. The assessee after working out tax dues, showed taxes paid as ₹ 1,38,84,356 when the total even as per the assessee's figure itself ought to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ation was rejected by the Assessing Officer based on the figures given in the e-return filed by the asses see. In any case, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on October 16, 2012 realising his mistake, rectified the earlier appellate order, dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee against the rejection of petition by the Assessing Officer. Thus, as the matter stands now, there is no order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated August 3, 2012 in the eyes of law. Hence the appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ight decision taken by the Assessing Officer. These findings of us is also supported by the earlier order of the Tribunal which has reached finality. At this stage, we are not in a position to take a different view than the earlier one. Accordingly, in our opinion, the assessee cannot be granted deduction under section 80-IB of the Act. Further, we observe that if there is technical error caused while downloading the e-return, the assessee could have brought to the knowledge of the competent aut .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version