BSC CANDC JOINT VENTURE V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/40/2026

AI Insights

The case involves BSC CANDC Joint Venture, the appellant, who appealed to the High Court of Delhi concerning a deduction under Section 80-IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant initially failed to claim this deduction in the original tax return due to inadvertence but later claimed it during the appellate proceedings before the Commissioner of Income Tax. The court did not find prima facie grounds to entertain the appeal initially but, after some argument and consultation, advised the appellant to seek relief from the CBDT under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act for the oversight.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 832674 (HC-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2026
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: ANURAG OJHA; V K SAKSENA; HEMLATA RAWAT
• Assessee Lawyers: ROHIT JAIN; DEEPESH JAIN; RAM KRISHNA RAO
• Keywords: CBDT; Deduction; Income Tax; Relaxation; Section 80-IA(4)
• Section: 119; 80-IA(4)

Judgement Text

"$~69 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 40/2026 BSC CANDC JOINT VENTURE .....Appellant Through: Mr. Rohit Jain, Mr. Deepesh Jain & Mr. Ram Krishna Rao, Advs. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .....Respondent Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC with Mr. V.K. Saksena, JSC & Ms. Hemlata Rawat, JSC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR O R D E R % 22.01.2026 1. The Court was not prima-facie inclined to entertain the matter, however after arguing for some time and consulting, Mr. Rohit Jain, learned counsel for the appellant stands advised to apply under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1961”) before the CBDT to seek relaxation. 2. The facts as pleaded in the case are that due to inadvertence, the appellant did not claim deduction under Section 80-IA(4) of the Act of 1961, while filing the original return. The same was however claimed before the Commissioner Income Tax appeal during appellate proceedings. 3. Learned counsel submitted that so far as the appellant’s entitlement for claiming exemption and its eligibility is concerned, the same is not in dispute, which is evident from the facts that in subsequent years the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2026 at 12:45:36 Printed from counselvise.com appellant has got the the benefit of deduction under Section from 80-IA(4). 4. Without recording any finding, the appellant is permitted to apply before the CBDT, for the desired relief along with a certified copy of the order instant within a period of two months from today. 5. In case any such application/request is filed, the CBDT shall consider the same in accordance with law. 6. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. 7. Needless to observe that we have not made any observation about the entitlement of the appellant or otherwise in relation to its entitlement of exemption. DINESH MEHTA, J. VINOD KUMAR, J. JANUARY 22, 2026/sr This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2026 at 12:45:36 Printed from counselvise.com "