TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 1756
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1)(a) of I. T. Act. (2) That Ld. C.I.T. (A) NFAC erred on facts and in law in not considering that the Return was filed within the due date extended by the CBDT vide order dated 27.09.2019 u/s 119 of the I. T. Act i.e. 31.10.2019. (3) That the present disallowance is highly excessive, contrary to the facts, law and principle of natural justice and without providing sufficient time and opportunity to have its say on the reasons relied upon by him. " 3. In this case, the assessee's return showing nil income was processed by Centralized Processing Center (CPC) of Income Tax Department, u/s 143(1) of the Act, and intimation was issued by CPC to the assessee, u/s 143(1) of the Act, wherein the assessee's claim for deduction u/s 80P of the Act was disallowed. The assessee filed appeal in the office of the Ld. CIT(A). Vide impugned appellate order dated 07/02/2024, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed assessee's appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to filed the return of income within the due date satisfied u/s 139(1) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has also observed in his impugned appellate order that First Appellate Authority was not invested with powers of con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thorize (any income tax authority, not being a Commissioner (Appeals) to admit an application or claim for any exemption, deduction, refund, or any other relief under this Act after expiry of the period specified by or under this Act for making such application or claim and deal with the some on merits in accordance with law." From the above, it is clear that the first appellate authorities have not been entrusted with powers of condoning delay in such cases. The intention of legislature with respect to such cases is very clear that the remedy in such situation lies in the section 119 of the Act. 4.2 At this stage, it will be relevant to reproduce the relevant provisions of section 143(1) of the Act which is as under: (a) The total income or loss shall be computed after making the following adjustment, namely- (i) Any arithmetical error in the return: (ii) An incorrect claim, if such incorrect claim is apparent from any information in the return (iii) Disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year for which set off of loss is claimed was furnished beyond the due date specifie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4.4 The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Veerappampalayam Primary Agricultural Co-op Society Ltd. Vs DCIT [138 taxmann.com 571] dealt the similar issue in WP No. 7038 of 2020 and has decided the matter in favour of the revenue. The Hon'ble Court has held as under: "Section 80AC of the Income Tax Act, 1961DeductionNot to be allowed unless return furnished (Belated Return)Assessment Year 2018-19Whether provisions of section 80AC(ii) make it clear that any deduction that is claimed under Part C of Chapter VIA would be admissible only if return of income in that case were filed within prescribed due date Held, yes, whether thus, no - Claim under any provisions of Part C of Chapter VIA would be admissible in case of a belated return Held, Yes. Section 143 of the Income Tax Act, 1961AssessmentGeneral (Intimation under section 143(1)(a))Assessment Year 2018-19, Whether scope of an intimation under section 143(1)(a), extends only to making adjustments based upon errors apparent from return of income and patent from record Held, yes (in favour of revenue)." The Hon'ble Court has noted that the provisions of section 80AC are very clear in the sense that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of section 80AC(ii), therefore, the claim of deduction is also not admissible in the light of the provision of section 80AC(ii) and in view of the decision of Apex Court in the case of Dilip Kumar( Supra). 4.6 Further, the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-lll, Bangalore and another Vs. M/s Wipro Limited (Judgment 'dated 11.07.2022 in the Civil Appeal No. 1449 OF 2022) has applied strict construction to reverse the findings of the Hon'ble High Court ("HC") of Karnataka which had earlier allowed carry forward of such losses. The Hon'ble SC held that the requirement of filing a declaration within a timeline is "mandatory" in nature as per the language of the provision. It reiterated the age-old principle that a taxing statute should be read as it is and held that the exemption/ deduction provisions should be "strictly" and "literally" complied with and, therefore, a strict interpretation should be adopted. 4.7 The appellant has relied on the following case laws (i) Order of the NFAC in Appeal no. NFAC/2018-19/10140506, dated 29/10/2020 in the case of Hardoi District Cane Growers Co-operative Society - Lt....