TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 1122
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....well before the last date of filing of return. Mistake was occurred by the staff of the Tax Consultant and assessee should not be penalized for the mistake of the staff of the Tax Consultant. 3. Your appellant craves, leave to add, alter, modify any of the grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing." 4. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a firm engaged in the integrated business of storage, handling and transportation. The assessee firm filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs. 37,86,280/- on 22.4.2014 which was processed u/s 143(1). The case selected for scrutiny through CASS and notice u/s 143(2) was served, followed by detailed questionnaire along with notice u/s 142(1). Books of accounts and other documents were produced for verification which have been verified on test check basis. Ld. A.O noticed that the assessee has claimed deduction u/s 80IB of the Act at Rs. 12,62,094/- but the return of income tax has been filed on 22.4.2014 which is beyond the date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the I.T. Act. For claiming deduction u/s 80IB of the Act assessee e-filed report and Form 10CCB and Form 3 CB & 3CD for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n submitted on 22.4.2014. He placed reliance on the following decisions; (i) Hansa Dalakoti V/s ACIT ITA No.3352/Del/2011 dated 25.1.2012 (2012) 32 CCH 0211 Del Trib. (ii) Fiberfill Engineeers Vs ACIT ITA No.1853/Del/2015 dated 25.2.2016 (2016) 46 CCH 0572 Del Trib. (iii) Symbiosis Pharmaceuticals P Ltd vs DCIT ITA No.501/CHD/2017 dated 4.10.2017 (2017) 51 CCH 0632 Chd. Trib. (iv) ITO Vs S. Venkataiah ITA No.984/Hyd/2011 dated 31.5.2012 (2012) 32 CCH 0386 Hyd. Trib. 6. Per contra Departmental Representative vehemently argued supporting the orders of both the lower authorities. 7. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. The assessee's sole grievance is that the lower authorities erred in denying the deduction u/s 80IB of the Act at Rs. 12,62,094/- just for non filing of income tax return before due date u/s 139(1) of the Act. 8. We observe that the income tax return has been e-filed by the assessee on 22.4.14 whereas u/s 139(1) of the Act the due date for filing of return of income was 30.9.2013. However in support of its claim u/s 80IB of the Act audit report in Form 10CCB has been e filed on 25.9.2013 a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dered in context of the principles enunciated by the Courts and the Tribunal, we concur with the arguments that literal interpretation is to be given to the procedural requirements in as much as these provisions being machinery provisions and thus being directory, they do not stand as a bar in the facts of a case wherein it can be demonstrated that there was a justifiable and reasonable cause for delay in filing of the return. The return which is well within the extended period as considered under sub section 4 of Section 139 of the Act, it was submitted, stands on a higher footing, then the return which is filed even beyond this period. The arguments of the Revenue that return filed late can only be considered if the delay is attributable to the Revenue, cannot be concurred with. In the face of decisions which hold that the said provision is a machinery provision, then this interpretation cannot apply only to cases where delay is attributable only to the Revenue. The said interpretation would be universally available as per facts to both the Sides. To hold that the cause for delay can be gone into, only if delay is attributable to the Revenue in the facts of the case woul....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce sheet was adopted by the Board of the company. On this very date i.e. 09.08.2013 we handed over the Digital Signatures of the Deponent to our auditor and Tax.Consultant CA A.S. Malhotra for filing Income Tax return and other reports on the Income Tax portal as returns and all audit reports had to be compulsorily e-filed. We came to know about the fact that Tax Audit report and Balance Sheet with annexures were filed on 29-9-2013 and report u/s 80-IC on Form 10CCB was filed on 28.10.2013 and the return of Income was uploaded only on 31.03.2014. 3. That filing of Income Tax return, audit report etc on Income Tax portal as a matter of routine is handled by Tax Consultant and in our case CA. A.S.Malhotra and as a normal practice digital signatures were also handed over to him alongwith Board Resolution authorizing him to use and affix our Digital Signatures on the documents to be submitted to Income Tax Department. 4. That our aforementioned Company is having 77.30 shares in another Company "Saitech Medicare Private Limited". CA. A.S. Malhotra was Auditor of that Company also. Besides Symbiosis Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. and a few other shareholders, this Company is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onsultants. As is a normal practice; Income Tax Consultant prepares and file ITRs on behalf of the assessee. We were also following the instructions of our Tax Consultant and late filing of ITR was not due to any fault of any of the officer of the Company but due to our Tax Consultant. 6.5 Accordingly, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, as we have discussed at length and seen from the record, we are of the view that the delay in filing of the return in the facts of the present case was for reasons beyond the control of the assessee and in fact, there was reasonable cause in the late filing of the return within the extended period as statutorily available under sub-section (4) of Section 139 of the Act. The decision rendered in the case of P. Bhavani, we find, on facts is not applicable and is entirely distinguishable since we concur with the arguments advanced by the Id. AR thereon same are not being repeated here. Similarly, we find that the decision in the case of M/s Lakshmi Energy & Foods Ltd. also has no role to place as in the facts of that case, not only the return was filed beyond the extended period of time statutorily available under sub-section....