TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 1042
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of precision turned parts. The works of the assessee is at Industrial Part IV, Plot No.9 V, Begampur (Haridwar), Uttarakhand and the assessee is claiming deduction u/s 80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') from AY 2010-11. For the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on 21.10.2017 u/s 139 of the Act declaring an income of Rs.2,53,10,300/- after claiming deduction of Rs.84,36,767/- u/s 80IC of Enterprises in Special Category States. Copy of the ITR acknowledgement along with computation of income is also placed on record. The assessee had got its accounts duly audited within prescribed time and audit reports u/s 44AB in Form 3CB-3CD and u/s 80IC i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....time of hearing, ld. AR submitted that through the Audit Report on Form No.10CCB dated 02.08.2017 regarding claim of deduction was filed along with the revised return of Income, he submitted that the figure of original returned Income & Revised Returned Income are same. He submitted that revised return is filed due to non filing of Audit Report on Form 10CCB along with original return of Income. He submitted that it is not the case of the assessee that it had claimed the deduction u/s 80IC in revised return of Income and the assessee had made claim of deduction in original return of income filed on 21.10.2017 itself. He further submitted that Audit Report u/s 44AB was also filed before the due date of filing of return of income i.e. 07.11.2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- Deductions in respect of certain incomes", no deduction shall be allowed to him there under.]" Section 80AC Deduction not to be allowed unless return furnished.- Where in computing the total income of an assessee of the previous year relevant to the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 2006 or any subsequent assessment year, any deduction is admissible under section 80-IA or section 80-IAB or section 80-IB or Section 80-IC, 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 (I) of section 139." He submitted that a reading of the both sections 80A(5) and 80AC, it emerges that to make a claim u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bsequently in the revised return. Accordingly, ld. AR further submitted that the report was furnished before the completion of assessment and filing or Audit Report along with the return of Income is not mandatory but directory, in this case, the same was filed before the completion of assessment, the requirement of section 80IC would be met. In this regard, he relied on several cases and filed the same in the case law compilation. Some of the case laws relied upon are given as under :- (i) CIT, Delhi vs. Contimeters Electricals Pvt. Ltd. - 2008 (12) TMI 4 dated 02.12.2008; (ii) Shree Bhavani Power Projects Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO - 2024 (8) TMI 938; (iii) Pr.CIT-1, Bhopal vs. M/s. Kilpest India Ltd. - 2020 94) TMI 824 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the assessee to claim the deduction u/s 80IC. 7. With regard to delay in submission of audit report, we observe that several courts have held that the assessee to file the audit report along with return were only directory in nature and not mandatory. We observe that Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs.. Contimeters Electricals Pvt. Ltd. (supra) have held as under :- "After issuance of the notice the Commissioner of Income Tax passed the order dated 29.03.2007 whereby he held that that he was fully satisfied that the assessment which had been completed by the Assessing Officer was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and that it was erroneous in as much as the assessee had not satisfied the conditions laid dow....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s High Court in CIT v. A.N. Arunachalam, 208 ITR 481 (Mad), which, again, while considering the provisions of Section 80J(6A), took the same view as that of the Gujarat High Court. We notice that there are other decisions of other Courts taking the same view. The decisions being, CIT v. Shivanand Electricals (1994) 209 ITR 63 (Bombay); Zenith Processing Mills v. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 721 (Guj.); CIT v. Jayant Patel (2001) 248 ITR 199 (Mad) and CIT v. Mahalaxmi Rice Factory (2007) 294 ITR 631 (P&H). In view of this long line on decisions of various High Courts in considering the provisions of Section 80J(6A) which are similar to the provisions of Section 80-IA(7), we feel that the Tribunal has arrived at the correct conclusion....