2024 (6) TMI 457 - AT - Income Tax

Assessee wins section 80IA(4) deduction claims filed under section 153A notices with timely Form 10CCB submission

Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-1 Versus ABCI Infrastructures Private Limited, Kolkata

The ITAT Kolkata ruled in favor of the assessee regarding fresh claims for deduction under section 80IA(4) filed in returns pursuant to section 153A ... Assessment u/s 153A - Lodging New Claims of Deduction u/s. 80-IA - impact of abatement of pending assessments on the ability to make new claims - fresh claims for deduction u/s 80IA(4) in the Returns of Income filed in compliance to notices issued u/s 153A in respect of the preceding six assessment years - HELD THAT:- While making fresh claims for deduction u/s 80IA(4) of the Act in the Returns of Income filed in compliance to notices issued u/s 153A of the Act in respect of the preceding six assessment years, assessee filed the corresponding forms (being Report of Audit of the Eligible Undertaking from an Accountant) in Form 10CCB [as required u/s 80IA(7)] electronically on 12.02.2021 i.e., within the time permitted as per Notices issued u/s 153A of the Act (i.e., before 15.02.2021). Thus we find that coordinate bench [2023 (4) TMI 527 - ITAT GUWAHATI] has given its finding by concluding it in para 104 extracted above, holding it in favour of the assessee, allowing the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA. By way of these grounds, revenue has contested that claim of deduction u/s. 80-IA for the assessment years succeeding the AY 2017- 18 can only be admissible if the deduction u/s 80-IA related to the same project(s) has been allowed in AY 207-18. Claim of assessee has been allowed in AY 2017-18 by the Coordinate Bench (supra). Accordingly, ground nos. 1 and 2 of the revenue are dismissed. Treatment of assessee as a “Developer of Infrastructure facility” and not a “Works Contractor” - Once the assessee has been taken as “Developer of Infrastructure facility” in the preceding years in which the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA has been allowed, in the year under consideration different treatment to the assessee for the same activities cannot be held as a “Works Contractor”. Accordingly, ground no. 3 taken by the revenue is dismissed. Issues Involved:1. Delay in filing the appeal.2. Admissibility of deduction u/s 80-IA not claimed in original returns.3. Classification of assessee as a 'Developer of Infrastructure' or 'Works Contractor.'Summary:1. Delay in Filing the Appeal:The revenue's appeal was delayed by 417 days, with the reason cited being the transfer posting of the undersigned officer. The Tribunal found the reason to be general and vague, not justifying the delay. Despite this, the Tribunal decided to take up the appeal on its merits due to the issue being covered by a prior decision of the coordinate bench.2. Admissibility of Deduction u/s 80-IA:The revenue contended that the assessee's claim for deduction u/s 80-IA for AY 2020-21 was inadmissible as it was not claimed in the original returns for the preceding years. The Tribunal noted that the coordinate bench had already decided this issue in favor of the assessee for AYs 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20. The Tribunal held that the returns filed u/s 153A substituted the original returns, allowing the assessee to make new claims, including deductions u/s 80-IA, even if not claimed in the original returns. The Tribunal supported this view with various judicial precedents, emphasizing that the returns filed u/s 153A should be treated as returns filed u/s 139, allowing all legitimate claims.3. Classification as 'Developer of Infrastructure' or 'Works Contractor':The revenue argued that the assessee should be classified as a 'Works Contractor' and not a 'Developer of Infrastructure,' which would affect the eligibility for deduction u/s 80-IA. The Tribunal referred to the coordinate bench's decision, which had already concluded that the assessee was a 'Developer of Infrastructure Facilities' and not a 'Works Contractor.' This classification had reached finality as it was not contested by the revenue in prior appeals.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the coordinate bench's findings that allowed the assessee's claim for deduction u/s 80-IA and confirmed the classification of the assessee as a 'Developer of Infrastructure Facilities.' The appeal was dismissed on the grounds that the issues had already been comprehensively addressed and decided in favor of the assessee in prior years.