2022 (7) TMI 945

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... revised return filed u/s 139(5) of the Act and not under the return of income filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. b The Appellant prays that the learned AO may kindly be directed to allow deduction u/s. 80 - lA of the Act amounting to Rs. 1,08,31,990/- as claimed by the Appellant by filing the revised return under section 139(5) of Act. GROUND NO. II a. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to compute the disallowance u/s 14A to an amount of Rs. 52,22,592/- even if the computation u/r 8D(2)(i) & (iii) considering the securities yielding tax-free income, was lower than the said amount. b. The Appellant prays that the learned AO may kindly be directed to re-compute the disallowance u/s 14A read with rule 8D (iii) Considering only the securities which yielded tax-free income without linking it with Rs. 52,22,592/-. GENERAL The Appellant craves leaves to add to, alter and/or amend the above grounds of appeal. 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested for not pressing Ground No. II (a) and (b) relating to disallowance made u/s. 14A of the I.T Act, 1961. Therefore, we dismiss ground nos. II (a) and II....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the original return was filed before the due date of filing of return. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further stated that the issue raised in the instant appeal is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of this Tribunal (ITAT, Kolkata) in the case of DCIT, Circle-4, Kol kata Vs. M/s. Mackintosh Burn Ltd, ITA No. 790/Kol/2014 for the AY 2006-07, order dt. 15-03-2017, wherein it has been held that if the original return of income is filed before the due date and the assessee failed to make such claim of deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act in the original return, then the said claim will be allowed if made in the revised return. Regarding furnishing of audit report on Form 10CCB as provided in section 80IA(7) of the Act, it was stated that the same is not in dispute. 10. Per contra, the Ld. DR vehemently argued supporting the orders of both the lower authorities stating that assessee's claim u/s. 80IA(4)(v) of the Act should not be entertained. 11. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed before us. The sole grievance of the assessee in this appeal is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in denying the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA(4)(v) of the Act m....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s admissible under any provision of this Chapter under the heading "C.-Deductions in respect of certain incomes", no such deduction shall be allowed to him unless he furnishes a return of his income for such assessment year on or before the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139. 13. We also find that Rule 18BBB(2) and Rule 12(2) of the I.T Rules, 1962 also has a direct bearing to the issue under consideration, which deals with furnishing of audit report electronically for claiming deduction and the relevant rules are reproduced below:- Rule:18BBB. (1) *** *** *** (2) A separate report is to be furnished by each undertaking or enterprise of the assessee claiming deduction under section 80-I or 80-IA or 80-IB [or 80-IC] and shall be accompanied by the Profit and Loss Account and Balance Sheet of the undertaking or enterprise as if the undertaking or the enterprise were a distinct entity. Rule: 12(2): The return of income required to be furnished in Form SAHAJ (ITR- 1) or Form No. ITR-2 or Form No. ITR-3 or 18[Form SUGAM (ITR- 4)] or Form No. ITR-5 or Form No. ITR-6 [or Form No. ITR-7] shall not be accompanied by a statement showing the computation of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t Tribunal in the case of Saffire Garments Vs. ITO reported in (2012) 28 Taxman.com 27 (Rajkot S.B) dated 30.11.2012 to the facts of the instant case. We find that the Hon'ble Special bench observed that the proviso to section 10A(IA) of the Act states that no deduction under this section shall be allowed to an assessee who does not furnish a return of his income on or before the due date specified under section 139(1) of the Act and accordingly, it was held that the above proviso is mandatory and not directory. The Hon'ble Special Bench distinguished catena of cases relied on by the assessee and held that those decisions were in different context, viz., filing of audit report, form No. 10CCB etc. and hence, were not applicable to the assessee. While distinguishing the cases, the Hon'ble Special Bench observed that in the instant case the issue was filing of return itself and not filing of documents along with the return. 11. In the instant case before us, the assessee had filed the original return of income on 29.11.2006 which was before the due date specified u/s. 139(1) of the Act i.e. 30.11.2006. Thereafter, the assessee had filed revised return on 28.03.2008 wher....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aim u/s. 80IA(4)(v) of the Act in the original return and claimed it in a valid revised return. However, in the above referred decision there is no reference to electronically filing the audit report on Form 10CCB before the due date prescribed under the Act. 17. We need to find that whether audit report in Form 10CCB electronically duly verified/certified by the Chartered Accountants has been filed electronically before the due date of filing of return of income applicable to the assessee, being subject to audit u/s. 44AB of the Act. On perusal of records, we find that nowhere in the proceedings below this aspect of furnishing of audit report on Form 10CCB for claiming of deduction u/s. 80IA(4)(v) of the Act has been dealt. Though during the course of hearing before us the Ld. Counsel for the assessee was asked about status of filing of such report, it was submitted that this matter was never in dispute. 18. It is pertinent to observe that in the past when audit report prescribed under the Act were not required to be filed electronically, then if the assessee has obtained such audit report before the prescribed due date, but failed to attach it with the Income-tax return, then i....