Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (2) TMI 749

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tain incomes (which includes deduction under section 80P of the Act), can be made if the Return is filed beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of Section 139. This amendment has been introduced w.e.f. 01.04.2021 and does not apply to the impugned assessment year involved herein namely Assessment Year 2019-20. Accordingly in our considered view denial of claim of deduction u/s. 80P of the Act would not come within the purview of prima facie adjustment under section 143(1)(a)(v) of the Act. Thus the case laws relied by the Ld. CIT(A) in its order is clearly distinguishable to the facts of the present case and the same are not applicable. CPC Centre is not correct in denying the claim of deduction u/s. 80P of the Act to t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ) dated 17.06.2020. Thus as against the Nil income filed by the assessee, by way of intimation u/s. 143(1) tax demand of Rs. 22,64,181/- was rised by the CPC Centre, Bengaluru. 3. Aggrieved against the intimation, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee appeal following the decision of the ITAT Bangalore in Smt. Revathi Raju vs. ITO in ITA No. 1425/Bang/2018 and the Hon ble ITAT Special Bench Rajkot in the case of Saffire Garments Vs. ITO in ITA No. 397/Rajkot/2009 as the Return of Income was filed belatedly u/s. 139(4) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following grounds of appeal: 1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax ( .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... completed. You may also check the status of your return by logging into www.incometaxIndiaefiling.gov.in . However in the intimation passed u/s. 143(1), the assessee was denied the claim of deduction of under section 80P as zero and demanded a tax of Rs. 22,65,234/-. 6.1. In this connection, the Ld. Counsel drawn our attention to the Co-ordinate Bench decision of the Chennai Bench in ITA No. 490/Chny/2021 dated 11.05.2022 in the case of Tenovia Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs. ADIT, CPC, Bangalore wherein the Tribunal has condoned the delay of 12 minutes and 31 seconds in uploading the Return of Income due to technical snag in the website of the Income Tax Department. Thus the Ld. A.R. pleaded, if at all, if there is a delay i.e. 4 minutes and 4 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 80P of the Act), can be made if the Return is filed beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of Section 139. This amendment has been introduced w.e.f. 01.04.2021 and does not apply to the impugned assessment year involved herein namely Assessment Year 2019-20. 8.2. Accordingly in our considered view denial of claim of deduction u/s. 80P of the Act would not come within the purview of prima facie adjustment under section 143(1)(a)(v) of the Act. Thus the case laws relied by the Ld. CIT(A) in its order is clearly distinguishable to the facts of the present case and the same are not applicable. 8.3. Further the Co-ordinate Bench of the Chennai Tribunal in the case of Tenovia Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (cited supra) has considered th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uccessfully explained the delay in filing the return on 16.10.2010 instead of 15.10.2010. Further, it is not the case of the respondents that the petitioner is not entitled to claim the carry forward loss under Section 139(3) of the Act. When the petitioner is entitled to claim the carry forward loss under Section 139(3) of the Income Tax Act, it cannot be stated that the delay in filing the return had occurred deliberately or on account of culpable negligence or on account of mala-fides. Further, the petitioner does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay. In fact, they run a serious risk. Moreover, when the petitioner had satisfactorily explained the delay in filing the said return, the approach of the first respondent should be justic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates