2022 (11) TMI 423

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in the business of manufacturing of medicines and drugs and filed its return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 on 30.03.2013 admitting NIL income. The case was selected for scrutiny by CASS and after following due procedure, the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act" in short] dated 30.03.2015 was completed by making disallowance of Rs..44,25,514/- under section 80IC of the Act. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has noted that the return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 was e-filed only on 30.03.2013, thereby, the assessee company has failed to e-file the return of income within the due date specified as per section 139(1) of the Act. The Assessing Officer has also noted that under ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Act. Hence, it is clear that the facts of assessment year 2012-13 are similar to the facts for assessment year 2011-12. Accordingly, by following the Tribunal order in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2011-12, the Assessing Officer has held that the assessee is not eligible to claim deduction under section 80IC of the Act for the assessment year 2012-13 and disallowed the claim under section 80IC of the Act of Rs..44,25,514/-. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A), by following assessee's own case for the assessment year 2011-12, confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee is eligible for claiming deduct....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tes were not fully aware of the fact that the return has to be filed before 30th September of every year. We are unable to accept the reason given by the assessee for delay in filing of the return. AY.2010-11 was the first year in which, furnishing of return electronically under digital signature was made mandatory. There were chances that the tax consultants may not be aware of the amended provisions in the first AY. The benefit of ignorance of tax consultants was given to the assessee in AY.2010-11. After committing the mistake once, if the same mistake is committed again in the next AY, it is un-pardonable. We are of the opinion that the assessee does not deserve any clemency. The assessee has not complied with the provisions of section ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the facts in the case of Gemini Communication Ltd., Vs. CIT (supra) are distinguishable from the facts in the instant case. The case on which the ld. Counsel for the assessee has placed reliance relates to AY.2008-09. In that AY, it was not mandatory to file return of income electronically. The electronic returns were required to be filed only on the directions of CBDT directions. The co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal under such situation observed: "12. .................As argued by the learned counsel appearing for the assessee, the statute consisting of Act and Rules speak of filing of return before due date and contents of that must be furnished in that return. The format has been prescribed by the Rules and also the contents ha....