9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 1076X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 22 declaring total income of Rs. 1,50,72,480/- which was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 16.03.2023, determining the total income at Rs. 1,76,55,670/-. In the said intimation order, the CPC, rejected the claim of deduction under Section 80JJAA of the Act of Rs. 25,83,187/- claimed by the assessee in the return of income. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(Appeals). During the course of appellate proceedings, Ld. CIT(Appeals) observed that the claim of deduction of Rs 25,83,187/- under Section 80JJAA of the Act has been rejected by the CPC for the reason that the appellant /Assessee failed to file the Form 10DDA within the prescribed time under the Statute. In this regard, the appellant /Assessee submitted that the said Form 10DA was duly uploaded by the CA on 01.10.2022 which is well before the extended due date of filing of return of income under Section 139(1) i.e. 07.10.2022, however, due to inadvertent mistake by oversight, such uploaded Form 10DA could not be "accepted" by the appellant company on or before 07.10.2022 i.e. due date of filing of return of income. Such Form 10DA was accepted by the assessee company on 06.01.2023 i. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statute redundant and ineffective. (iii) Further, the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-Ill, Bangalore and another Vs. M/s Wipro Limited (Judgment dated 11.07.2022 in the Civil Appeal No. 1449 OF 2022) has applied strict construction to reverse the findings of the Hon'ble High Court ("HC") of Karnataka which had earlier allowed carry forward of such losses. The Hon'ble SC held that the requirement of filing a declaration within a timeline is "mandatory" in nature as per the language of the provision. It reiterated the age-old principle that a taxing statute should be read as it is and held that the exemption/ deduction provisions should be "strictly" and "literally" complied with and, therefore, a strict interpretation should be adopted. The Supreme Court has stated as under- "In view of the above discussion and for the reasons stated above, we are of the opinion that the High Court has committed a grave error in observing and holding that the requirement of furnishing a declaration under Section 10B (8) of the IT Act is mandatory, but the time limit within which the declaration is to be filed is not mandatory but is directory. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... od specified by or under this Act for making such application or claim and deal with the some on merits in accordance with law." From the above, it is clear that the first appellate authorities have not been entrusted with powers of condoning delay in such cases. The intention of legislature with respect to such cases is very clear that the remedy in such situation lies in the section 119 of the Act. (v) Further, at this juncture, it would not be irrelevant to discuss the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CC v. Dilip Kumar & Company [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239, wherein the Hon'ble Court has laid down following principles: (a) Exemption notification/provisions should be interpreted strictly, the burden of proving applicability would be on the assessee to show that his case comes within the parameters of exemption clause or exemption notification. (b) In case of ambiguity in a charging provision, the benefit must necessarily go in favour of subject/assessee but the same is not true for an exemption notification wherein the benefit of ambiguity must be strictly interpreted in favor of the revenue/state From the principle laid down by the Hon& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Gujarat High Court in the case of Association of Indian Panel Board Manufacturer in which on similar facts, the Gujarat High Court held that once the appropriate form in the form of Accountant report is available with the tax officer at the time of when assessment was completed, then the benefit of exemption/deduction cannot be denied to the assessee. 6. In response, the Ld. DR placed reliance on the observations made by Ld. CIT(Appeals) in the appellate order. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. On going through the facts of the instant case, we observe that this is not the first year of claim of deduction under Section 80JJA of the Act and similar claim was also made by the assessee/appellant in the previous assessment year as well. From the facts placed on record, it is observed that the chartered accountant of the assessee filed Accountant's report in Form 10DA before the due date of filing of return of income. This position has not been disputed by the Department. Admittedly, the above report was not accepted by the assessee before the due date of filing of return of income. However, the Report in Form 10DA filed by the accountant of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Sections 11(1) and 11(2) on the ground that the audit report was not filed. 5.6 The tribunal further committed an error in appreciating the import of Section 119 2(b) of the Act inasmuch as the application contemplated thereunder is only additional remedy for the assessee which could not be said to be compulsorily resorted to by the assessee. The circular No.7/18 dated 20.12.2018 issued under Section 119 of the Act could not be, therefore said to have taken away the appellate remedy. 5.7 The tribunal misdirected itself in yet another way when it observed that The Finance Act, 2015 with effect from 1.4.2016, that is from assessment year 2016-17 changed the legal position. There is no such change which could be said to have altered the legal position. The only change is with regard to compulsory filing of audit report in Form 10B in electronically form which is made mandatory under Rule 12 (2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 but there is no change with regard to the substantive law about filing of audit report as stated above. 6. The moot aspect thus centres around to the requirement of the availability of the audit report when the assessment was undertaken by the Assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
