TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (2) TMI 638
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not substantiate its claim had inflated the cost of WIP without incurring any expenses so as to claim higher deduction u/s. 80IB of the Act. (2) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CITA) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. (3) It is therefore prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the order of the Assessing Officer be restored to the above extent." ITA No. 796/Ahd/2011 A.Y. 2007-08 filed by Assessee "1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in rejecting the books of accounts of the appellant u/s. 145 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the disallowance of deduction of Rs. 13,68,61,112/- claimed by the appellant u/s. 801B(10) of the I.T. Act, 1961 being an amounts for the deductions claimed of Rs. 6,20,64,195/- in Swaminarayan Enterprise, Rs. 3,89,76,532/- in Ghanshyam Enterprise and Rs. 3,58,20,384/- in Neelkanth Enterprise as per Form No.10CCB certified by The Chartered Accountant. 3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in holding that there is non c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The case of the assessee was selected by scrutiny and notice u/s. 143(2) was issued on 04-03-2008 and served upon accordingly. The other statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) were issued on 14-10-2009 and served on the assessee on 15-10-2009. Vide letter dated 26-10-2009, the assessee in compliance to notices issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act submitted hard copy of return of income for assessment year 2007-08. Statement of total income for cost forming the part of the statement of income, audit report u/s. 44AB of the Act and filed audit account with annexures, appendixes and enclosures were filed. The Assessing Officer observed that as provided u/s. 139(1) of the Act, the assessee was required to file his return of income by 30-09- 2007. The assessee has claimed deduction under chapter VIA of the Act specially under 80IB(10) amounting to Rs. 13,68,61,112/-. The Assessing Officer observed that the claim of deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act has to further certain requirements which was specifically quoted from para 9 to 13 of the assessment order. The Assessing Officer further observed that in view of non-compliance of sub-section 80AC to his fulfillmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is addition thereby holding that the amount of unexplained income has already been offered for tax as gross profits of the respective projects and therefore the question of invoking section 69C is not warranted. There is no need to interfere with the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue. Hence, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 8. As regards the assessee's appeal, the ld. Authorized Representative submitted that merely because return of income is not filed within the time limit prescribed u/s. 139(1) that by itself cannot be the reason for rejecting the claim of deduction u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act. The fact of the matter is that the return of income is filed u/s. 139 of the Act and is duly accompanied by the TAR and report for claim u/s. 80IB(10) of the Act. Though the word shall be used as u/s. 80IB(10) which denotes the condition has to be mandatorily followed in certain situations the term shall also includes hm. Provisions should not be so strictly constructed and the reason for not fling being bonafide and genuine should be considered. The Assessing Officer has completely mis-understood the contentions of the assessee. The search operations took place on 09-02-2005 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss as narrated for assessment year 2006-07 commences. It is subsequent to assessment year 2006-07 that the books of accounts, audit and return filing for assessment year 2007-08 is undertaken. This is because only after the opening balances are adopted the process of the complete books of accounts commences. The ld. Authorized Representative relied upon the following decisions:- 1. Judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of Goodluck Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. 2. Judgment of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of Pushpadhanwa Estate Owners Association 3. Order of Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in case of Rajhans Builders 41 SOT 331 4. Order of Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in case of Vallentine Cine Vision Ltd ITA #2497/Abd/2009 5. Order of Hon'ble Chennai Tribunal in case of Shri R Samiappan ITA#237/Mds/2009 6. Order of Hon'ble Vishakhapatnam Tribunal in case of Dr Gangina Suguna Rajahmundry ITA #173 & 174/Vizag/2011 7. Order of Hon'ble Chennai Tribunal in case of Sahul India Ltd ПА # 768 & 769/Kol/2011 8. HP Housing & Urban Development Authority (HIMUDA) 157 taxmann.com 598 Himachal Pradesh 9. Fiberfill Engineers 85 taxmann.com 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come was that of 30-09-2007 and the search operations took place on 19-02-2005 and the details were available in the month of Nov, 2006 as stated by the assessee before the CIT(A) as well as before us. The reasoning given by the assessee that within a period of six months from the date of filing of return of income for assessment year 2006- 07, the assessee have filed return of income for assessment year 2007-08 will not help the assessee as the assessee was very well aware of mandatory date of filing the original return of income. The decision of Hon'ble Apex Court has not been considered in the context of the mandatory filing and the compliance of the due date as given u/s. 80AC including that of decision of Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court as well as the order of the Tribunal passed in ITA 415/2020 order dated 16-06-2023. As regards, the decisions of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of Goodluck Automobile Pvt. Ltd. & Pushpadhanwa Estate Owners Association, the said decisions were taken in the context of the facts emerging in those respective assessee's cases & in present assessee's case facts remains that return was filed belatedly that is beyond due date despite availabili....