TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 709X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0AC carries any retrospective effect. Thus find no merit in Revenue s instant preliminary argument going by stricter interpretation as per Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Mumbai vs. M/s. Dilip Kumar And Co. Ors. [ 2018 (7) TMI 1826 - SUPREME COURT] As per sec. 80A(5) of the Act that the assessee had not made the impugned claim even in it s alleged belated return - DR failed to rebut the clinching fact emerging from the assessee s pleadings in Form-35 that the assessee had indeed raised the impugned claim in it s return filed on 11.12.2019. It is reiterated that sec. 80AC of the Act has already been held as not applicable in light of the detailed discussion in preceding paragraph(s). Faced with this situation,we reject the Revenue s insta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im section-80P(2)(a)(i) deduction of Rs. 19,33,650/-; the Revenue s vehement preliminary stand in light of assessment as well as CIT(A)'s detailed discussion is that the same is not eligible to be granted once no return had been filed within the time stipulated by the Assessing Officer in furtherance to his sec. 142(1) notice. 3. Learned DR quoted sec. 80AC of the Act that filing of sec. 139(1) return is a condition precedent for claiming the impugned deduction. It is noticed from a perusal of the CIT(A)'s detailed discussion in para-6 that the assessee had indeed filed it s return, albeit belatedly, in response to sec. 142(1) notice. That being the case, I am of the opinion that the amended provision herein i.e., sec. 80AC of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue is found to be no more res integra once hon ble apex court s recent landmark decision in Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., vs., CIT [2021] 431 ITR 1 (SC) has rejected the Revenue s very stand. Faced with this situation, I thus accept the assessee s impugned sec. 80P(2)(a)(i) deduction claim in very terms. Necessary computation shall follow as per law. Ordered accordingly. 6. Delay of 116 days is condoned as per assessee s solemn averments in light of Collector, Land Acquisition vs., MST Katiji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) having settled the law long back that all such technical aspects must make a way for the cause of substantial justice. 7. This assessee s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court on 16.04.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
