TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 413
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2021-22 for claiming deduction u/s 80 IA of the Act.[page 5]. That the aforesaid intimation order u/s 143 (1) (a) (ii) bears no: - CPC/21-22/290800403 and same is dated 13.11.2022 which is hereinafter referred to as the "Impugned Intimation Order". 2.2 That the Assessee is a company engaged in building and operating toll infrastructure projects. The assessee had filed its return of Income on 09.03.2022 much before the due date of filing of the return of Income. The assessee however filed audit report on 07.05.2022, under ACK No.- 610556290070522. The CPC Bangalore however disallowed the deduction under section 80 IA merely on the ground that the audit report was furnished after due date of filing the return of Income by the assessee. Addition of Rs. 10,49,29,280/- was thus made. 2.3 That the Assessee being aggrieved by the "Impugned Intimation Order" prefers the first appeal u/s 246A of the Act before the Ld. CIT (A) who by the "Impugned Order" has allowed the first appeal of the assessee on the grounds and reasons stated therein. The core grounds and reasons for the dismissal of the first appeal were as under:- "5.4 appellant. In the submissions made the appellant h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Commissioner of Income Tax passed the order dated 29.03.2007 whereby he held 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 down u/s 80-IA and consequently the deduction under that section for the sum of Rs. 14,27,351/-had been wrongly allowed. The CIT(A), therefore, cancelled the assessment which had been earlier framed and directed the AO to complete the assessment as per law, in terms of the directions given in the said order. Being aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal which was allowed by the Tribunal by virtue of the impugned order. The Tribunal took the view that the provisions of section 80IA(7) with regard to filing of the audit report along with the return were not mandatory and were merely directory. In coming to such conclusion, the Tribunal referred to the decisions of the Gujarat High Court in CIT vs. Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries, 201 ITR 325 (Guj.). In that decision the provisions of Section 80J(6A) were considered. The wordi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....audit report, thereby, holding that the same is not mandatory. Therefore, it is clear that before the assessment is completed if such report is filed, no fault could be found against the assessee. That was also the view of the Delhi High Court in the case in CIT v. Contimeters Electricals (P.) Ltd. [2009] 317 ITR 249/ 178 Taxman 422 (Delhi), wherein the Delhi High Court, by following the judgements of the Madras High Court in CIT v. Α.Ν. Arunachalam [1994] 208 ITR 481/75 Taxman 529 and in CIT v. Jayant Patel [2001] 248 ITR 199/117 Taxman 707 (Mad.) held that the filing of audit report along with the return was not mandatory but directory and that if the audit report was filed at any time before the framing of the assessment, the requirement of the provisions of the Act should be held to have been met. 6. That is also the consistent view of the other High Courts, including the High Court of Bombay in CIT v. Shivanand Electronics [1994] 209 ITR 63/75 Taxman 93 (Bom.), apart from Gujarat High Court in Zenith Processing Mills v. CIT [1996] 219 ITR 721 (Guj.) and Punjab and Haryana High Court in CIT v. Maholaxmi Rice Factory [2007] 294 ITR 631/1.63 Taxman 565 (Punj. & ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 10CCB was filed/uploaded belatedly on 07/05/2022. However, the audit report in Form 10CCB was available with the AO, CPC when the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act was issued on 13/11/2022 5.9 In view of above, respectfully following the decisions given by the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Pune 'A' Bench dated 30.12.2024 and Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi 'G' Bench dated 30.01.2021 as given above, the appellant is found to be entitled to deduction claimed u/s 80IA of Rs. 10,29,33,035/-. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of deduction u/s 80IA of Rs. 10,29,33,035/- to the appellant and delete the adjustment made in intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Act, dated 13/11/2022. 5.10 Ground no. 4 is general in nature and does not require adjudication. 6.0 In the result, the appeal of the appellant is allowed." 2.4 That the Revenue being aggrieved by the "Impugned Order" has preferred the instant appeal before this tribunal and has raised the following grounds of appeal in the form no.-36 against the "Impugned Order" which are as under:- "Whether on the facts and circumstances....