Deduction under section 80IA remanded for fresh consideration due to non-speaking order lacking judicial precedent analysis

The ITAT Rajkot remanded a case back to CIT(A) for fresh consideration regarding deduction under section 80IA. The assessee's claim was initially rejected by AO for non-filing of Form 10CCB with return of income. CIT(A) allowed the deduction, holding that filing Form 10CCB within specified date under section 80IA(7) is directory, not mandatory. However, ITAT found CIT(A)'s order non-speaking, lacking analysis of relevant judicial precedents including Supreme Court's Wipro Ltd. judgment. The matter was restored to CIT(A) for de-novo consideration. Department's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

---

---

Issues involved:
The appeal filed by the Revenue against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi regarding the disallowance of deduction under Section 80IA of the Act for Assessment Year 2019-20.

Grounds of Appeal:
1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 6,74,36,587/- u/s 80IA of the Act.
2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not giving due cognizance to the provisions of section 80IA(7) of the Act.
3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 6,74,36,587/- u/s 80IA of the Act.
4. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer.
5. The revenue craves leaves to add, amend, alter or withdraw any ground of appeal.

Summary of the Judgment:
The assessee filed its original return of income for A.Y. 2019-20 claiming deduction under Section 80IA of the Act. The Department disallowed the claim, but the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee based on the documents submitted. The Department appealed, arguing that the Ld. CIT(A) did not apply his mind and did not consider the mandatory requirement of filing Form 10CCB. The Counsel for the assessee argued that non-filing of Form 10CCB along with the return does not warrant rejection of the claim. The ITAT observed that the Ld. CIT(A) did not analyze the relevant judicial precedents and directed a fresh order considering all aspects.

Conclusion:
The ITAT allowed the appeal of the Department for statistical purposes and directed the matter to be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh order after considering the relevant judicial precedents.

---