https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446776 ITAT Mumbai allowed the appeal regarding deduction under section 80-IC for an eligible unit in Rudrapur, Uttarakhand. The AO denied the claim stating Form 10CCB was not filed before the due date. ITAT held that since the assessee had specified domestic transactions exceeding Rs. 5 crores requiring compliance with section 92E, the due date for filing return was 30/11/2015 under clause (aa) of Explanation-2 to section 139(1). The original return filed on 29/11/2015 with Form 10CCB was valid and timely. The tribunal ruled that detailed examination of Form 10CCB compliance was beyond the limited scope of section 143(1) processing, which only permits prima facie adjustments. The CIT(A)'s order upholding the denial was set aside. en-us Fri, 08 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Dec 2023 08:59:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446776 ITAT Mumbai allowed the appeal regarding deduction under section 80-IC for an eligible unit in Rudrapur, Uttarakhand. The AO denied the claim stating Form 10CCB was not filed before the due date. ITAT held that since the assessee had specified domestic transactions exceeding Rs. 5 crores requiring compliance with section 92E, the due date for filing return was 30/11/2015 under clause (aa) of Explanation-2 to section 139(1). The original return filed on 29/11/2015 with Form 10CCB was valid and timely. The tribunal ruled that detailed examination of Form 10CCB compliance was beyond the limited scope of section 143(1) processing, which only permits prima facie adjustments. The CIT(A)'s order upholding the denial was set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 08 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446776