2025 (8) TMI 1813

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... referred to as "Act"] for Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2007-08. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] erred in confirming the denial of exemption/deductions under Section 11 of the Act resorted to by the Centralized Processing Centre, Income Tax Department, Bengaluru (herein after referred to as "CPC ITD") while processing the Return of Income under Section 143(1) of the Act on the grounds that the Audit Report in Form 10B was filed belatedly, though with the Return of Income which was filed in prescribed time. 2. The learned CIT(Appeals) and the learned CPC ITD failed to appreciate....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on 11(6) of the Act being the amount of capital expenditure incurred to be allowed as application of income. It is submitted that the disallowances referred to above are unjustified and bad in law as the denial of exemption under section 11 of the Act itself is founded and unwarranted. 5. It is submitted that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the adjustments resorted to by the learned CPC ITD while processing the Return of Income under Section 143(1) of the Act. 6.It is submitted that the basic issue leading to denial of exemption under Section 11 of the Act viz. delay in filing the Audit Report in Form 10B, itself is a highly debatable question of la....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 4.1 It has been further argued by the Ld. AR that firstly the adjustment u/s. 143(1) could not have been made being beyond the scope of adjustments allowed under the section. Further, no opportunity was given to the assessee in this regard before making the adjustment by the CPC. Even otherwise on the merits, it has been argued by the Ld. AR that in several decisions of the co-ordinate Benches, it has been held that requirement to file the audit report by the prescribed time limit is only directory and not mandatory. Ld. AR has placed reliance on the order of the co-ordinate bench for A.Y. 2022-23 in its own case wherein the identical issue has been decided in favour of the assessee. 5. Ld. DR on the other hand has strongly relied on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed on 07.11.2022 along with the return of income. The return had been filed within the extended due date as per the CBDT circular No. 20/2022 dated 26.10.2022 vide which the due date had been extended from 31.10.2022 to 07.11.2022. The intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act was issued on 03.03.2023 as such the audit report was on record much before the processing of return. In this regard, the Ld. AR cited several decisions of the ITAT as well as Hon'ble High court of Gujarat in its favour. Specifically reliance was placed on the latest order of coordinate Bench in the case of Snehasadan Vs. ITO in ITA No. 2225/Mum/2024 dated 24.07.2024, where in a similar situation it has been held as under: 5. We find force in assessee's forego....