TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 1370
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oth dated 06.03.2025 and 11.04.2025 arising out of assessment orders dated 28.12.2022 and 19.06.2023 of Learned Assessing Officer, Central Processing Centre (CPC)/DCIT [hereinafter referred as 'the Ld. AO'] for Assessment Years 2021-2022 and 2022-23 respectively. 2. Since, both the appeals of the assessee are having identical issues, therefore, they are adjudicated by a common order. First we take up the appeal for Assessment Year 2021-22 in ITA No.3357/Del/2025. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed ITR of net amount payable as Nil. The assesse had filed return of income on 25.02.2022 declaring total taxable income of Rs. 2,52,740/- after claiming deduction of Rs. 4,20,06,119/- u/s 80IAC of the Act. The assessee's IT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1961. 2.1 That the Ld. Addl. CIT(A) has acted contrary to judicial discipline by disregarding binding precedents of Hon'ble Courts and the ITAT, where similar claims were allowed despite such technical/procedural lapses." 5. The Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of deduction of Rs. 4,20,06,119/- claimed u/s 80IAC of the Act made by Ld. AO. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in incorrectly pointing out discrepancies in Form 10CCB and Tax Audit ignoring that the case was of deduction disallowed u/s 143(1) and not of filing startup registration details and not affording an opportunity to explain such discrepancies. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that when....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tions. 6. The Ld. Authorized Representative for Department submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has referred to factual errors. 7. From examination of record in the light of the aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 06.03.2025 upheld the disallowance of deduction of Rs. 4,20,06,119/- u/s 80IAC of the Act. 7.1 The assessee had filed its return of income on 25.02.2022 declaring total income Rs. 2,52,740/- after claiming deduction u/s 80IAC of the Act, a sum of Rs. 4,20,06,119/-. ITR of assessee as accompanied by Tax Audit Report u/s 44AB of the Act and uploaded on the Departmental Portal on 19.01.2022. The specified Audit Report in Form 10CCB in support of claim u/s 80IAC dated 18.01.2022 was uploa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment on 10.11.2017 whereas the return of income was filed on 24.10.2017 and the return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 30.10.2018. We find that CIT(A) while deciding the issue in favour of the assessee has given the finding that though there was delay in upholding Form 10CCB but the same was uploaded before the return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. For allowing the ground of assessee, CIT(A) had relied on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Contimeters Electricals (P) Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 422 (Delhi) and other decisions. We find that Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. G.M.Knitting Industries (P) Ltd. (2017) 71 taxmann.com 35 (SC) has held even though Form 10CCB wa....