COSMOS ENGITECH PRIVATE LIMITED,ATLADRA V. DCIT, VADODARA

ITA 1773/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Cosmos Engitech Pvt Ltd, which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The appeal was concerning the denial of a deduction claim under section 80JJAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the late filing of Form No. 10DA, which reports the number of employees employed by the company. The lower authorities had rejected the claim because the form was not filed by the due date prescribed under section 44AB of the Act. However, the company argued that the form was completed and the Unique Document Identification Number (UDIN) was generated before the due date, but due to technical issues, it was uploaded later.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 298714 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2023-2024
• Other Referred Cases: CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. [2016] 71 taxmann.com 35
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: UDAY KAKNE
• Assessee Lawyers: MANISH J. SHAH
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 250; 143(1); 44AB

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ ‘C’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE S/SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1773/Ahd/2024 Assessment Year : 2023-24 Cosmos Engitech Pvt Ltd Plot NO.85/2, Cosmos House Padra Road Vadodara. PAN : AAACC 7647 J Vs The DCIT, Cir.1(1)(4) Vadodara. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by : Shri Manish J. Shah, and Shri Rushin Patel, ARs. Revenue by : Shri Uday Kakne, Sr.DR सुनवाई क\t तारीख/Date of Hearing : 20/03/2025 घोषणा क\t तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 20/03/2025 आदेश आदेश आदेश आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member The above appeal has been filed by the assessee against order passed by the Ld.Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “ld.CIT(A)] dated 30.8.2024 under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (\"the Act\" for short) arising out of the order of passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2023-24. 2. The sole issue involved in this appeal is regarding the denial of claim of deduction under section 80JJAA of the Act on account of ITA No.1773/Ahd/2024 2 delay in filing of Form No.10DA, which is relating to number of employees employed by the assessee-company. 3. The ld.counsel for the assessee has submitted that both the lower authorities have rejected the claim of the assessee under section 80JJAA of the Act holding that report in Form no.10DA was not filed on or before the due date prescribed under section 44AB of the Act, which was 30.9.2023. The ld.counsel for the assessee has brought our attention to the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) to submit that it was duly submitted before the ld.CIT(A) that the deduction claimed u/s 80JJAA was based on the report of Chartered Accountant received on 22/09/2023, and even UDIN -Unique Document Identification Number was also generated on the 22/09/2023 by the company’s Chartered Accountant, but due to some issues, such report could not be uploaded online. However, the same was uploaded/filed even before the application of mind by the concerned Assessing Officer (in short “AO”), and before the communication of intimation by the CPC under section 143(1) of the Act. 4. We note that the said audit report in form no.10DA was filed to the concerned AO before processing of the return. The section 80JJA is the deduction provision and not the exemption of provision. The ld.AO was supposed to consider the said report at the time of processing of the return of income. The law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. [2016] 71 taxmann.com 35 is squarely applicable to the case on hand. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) and restore the matter to the AO to examine the case of the assessee. If "