G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,WEST DELHI, INDIA V. CENTRAL PROCESSING CENTER , BANGALORE

ITA 5285/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves G4S Secure Solutions (India) Private Limited, which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that upheld the disallowance of a deduction under section 80JJAA by the Assessing Officer. The deduction was initially disallowed due to the late submission of Form 10DA, which is required for claiming the deduction under section 80JJAA. The Tribunal examined whether the late submission of the form, which was eventually submitted before the processing of the return, justified the disallowance of the deduction. The Tribunal referenced several precedents and judicial decisions to conclude that the deduction should not be denied based on procedural lapses in form submission, especially when the substantive requirements were met.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 315813 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2023-2024
• Other Referred Cases: International Tractors Ltd. vs. DCIT, Canadian Speciality Vinyls vs. ITO, CIT vs. GM Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd., Association of Indian Panelboard Manufacturer vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CIT vs. Panama Chemical Works, Kumaon Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT, Aprameya Engineering Ltd. vs. ITO, Jeans Knit (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT, Krushi Vibhag Karmchari Vrund Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit vs. Income-tax Officer, Captain Steel India Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURENDER PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SALIL KAPOOR; ANANYA KAPOOR
• Keywords: Set aside; Revised return; Procedural lapse

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: B : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5285/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2023-24 G4S Secure Solutions (India) Private Limited, 9th Floor, Tower-B, Good Earth Trade Tower, Sector-62, Bhondsi SO (168), Gurugram, Haryana – 122 102. PAN: AAACG1625Q Vs CPC, Bengaluru. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Salil Kapoor, Ms Ananya Kapoor, & Shri Shivam Yadav, Advocates Revenue by : Shri Surender Pal, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 12.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 16.05.2025 ORDER PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: The appeal by the appellant/assessee is against the order dated 23.09.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-6, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as ‘the ld. CIT(A)’] u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) in appeal arising out of the order dated 27.03.2024 u/s ITA No.5285/Del/2024 2 143(1) of the Act of the CPC, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as ‘the ld. AO’), for assessment year 2023-24. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the original return of income along with Form 10DA on 29.11.2023. Subsequently, the return of income along with Form 10DA was revised on 30.12.2023. The CPC processed the return disallowing deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act, vide intimation dated 27.03.2024. Against this intimation dated 27.03.2024, the appellant assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A) which was partly allowed, vide order dated 23.09.2024. 3. Being aggrieved, the appellant-assessee has preferred the present appeal. 4. Learned Authorised Representative for appellant-assessee submitted that the ld.CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of the ld. AO in not allowing deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that filing of Form 10DA is directory which stands fulfilled once Accountant’s Report is furnished and deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act cannot be denied solely for belated filing of the prescribed form. The ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that Form 10DA was filed on 30th December, 2023 which was prior to intimation drawn u/s 143(1) of the Act on 27.03.2024. Therefore, while processing the return of income u/s 143(1) of the Act, the relevant form was available with the CPC to enable grant of deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act. ITA No.5285/Del/2024 3 Reliance was placed on the decisions of: the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in International Tractors Ltd. vs. DCIT (2021) 435 ITR 85 (Del) dated 7th April, 2021; Canadian Speciality Vinyls vs. ITO, ITA No.7612/Del/2019 (Delhi ITAT), dated 02.06.2023; and also on the following decisions:- - CIT vs. GM Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. [2016] 71 taxmann.com 35 (Hon’ble Supreme Court); - Association of Indian Panelboard Manufacturer vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax [2023] 157 Taxmann.com 550 (Gujarat); - CIT vs. Panama Chemical Works [2007] 165 Taxman 135 (MP); - Kumaon Exports Pvt. Ltd., v. DCIT (ITA No. 39/Del/2024) (Delhi ITAT); - Aprameya Engineering Ltd. vs. ITO [2024] 164 taxmann.com 740 (Ahmedabad-Trib.); - Jeans Knit (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT [2022] 138 taxmann.com 480 (Bangalore- Trib.) - Krushi Vibhag Karmchari Vrund Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit vs. Income-tax Officer [2023] 147 taxmann.com 449 (Nagpur-Trib.); & - Captain Steel India Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax [2024] 166 taxmann.com 351 (Kolkata-Trib.) 5. The Ld. DR relied on the order of the ld.CIT(A). ITA No.5285/Del/2024 4 6. From examination of the record and in the light of the aforesaid rival contentions, it is crystal clear that the appellant-assessee filed the original return of income along with Form 10DA on 29.11.2023. Subsequently, the return of income along with Form 10DA was revised on 30.12.2023. The ld. AO processed the return of income u/s 143(1), vide order dated 27.03.2024, disallowing deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act. The ld.CIT(A), vide order dated 23.09.2024, dismissed ground of appeal No.2 by relying the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in PCIT vs. Wipro Ltd. (Civil appeal No.1449 of 2022) and in CC vs. Dilip Kumar & Company (2018) 95 taxmann.com 327. 7. In ITA No.231/Kol/2022 titled as Captain Steel India Ltd. vs. DCIT (2024) 166 taxmann.com 351 (Kolkata Trib.), order dated 1st February, 2023, the ITAT Kolkata Bench has held as under:- “8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record and given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions made before us. We note that it is a case where a return has been processed u/s. 143(1) vide issuance of intimation. Subsequently at the first appellate stage, assessee has claimed a deduction u/s. 80JJAA of the Act by raising an additional ground which the Ld. CIT(A) has not admitted. We note that Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goetz (India) P. Ltd. (supra) has held that even if a claim is not made before the AO, it can be made before the appellate authority and in the said judgment, the jurisdiction of appellate authority to entertain such a claim has not been negatived. 8.1. We note that assessee did not have the opportunity to raise the contention before the Ld. AO as its return was processed by CPC, Bangalore and intimation was issued u/s. 143(1) and, therefore, the assessee had no opportunity to make a fresh claim by way of filing a revised return before the CPC, Bangalore since the process is Captain Steel India Ltd., AY 2019-20 completed. The claim made by the assessee at the first appellate stage is an allowable claim in view of the judgments of ITA No.5285/Del/2024 5 Hon'ble High Courts of Karnataka and Delhi referred in above paragraphs which have dealt with the identical fact pattern, in favour of the assessee. 8.2. We further note that the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Wipro Ltd. (supra) has observed a distinction between the claim made under Chapter-III and that made under Chapter-VIA and, therefore, is not applicable in the present case as it is a claim made u/s. 80JJAA of the Act falling under Chapter VIA of the Act. 8.3. We also note that assessee has been claiming a deduction for the preceding as well as subsequent assessment year i.e. AYs 2018-19 and 2020-21 which has been allowed by the Ld. CIT(A) at the appellate stage. The facts relevant to the claim of deduction made by the assessee were placed before the Ld. CIT(A). Also, the submissions made before the Ld. CIT(A) in respect of the claim of deduction made by the assessee are placed on record in the paper book. 9. Considering the facts on record and the judicial precedence as referred above, we have no hesitation in allowing the admission of additional ground raised by the assessee in respect of claim of deduction u/s. 80JJAA of the Act which has been raised at the first appellate stage. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee in this respect are allowed. 10. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 8. In ITA No.52/AHD/2024 titled as Akuntha Projects (P) Ltd. vs. Dy. Director, CPC, (2024) 162 taxmann.com 861 (Ahmedbad - Trib.), order dated 20th May, 2024, the ITAT Ahmedabad Bench has held as under:- “9. Accordingly, looking into the instant facts, and the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and jurisdictional Gujarat High Court referred to above, we are of the considered view that the claim of the assessee/appellant for deduction under Section 80JJA of the Act cannot be denied for the reason that firstly, the chartered accountant of the assessee had uploaded Form 10DDA before the due date of filing of return of income, and it was only because of procedural lapse/mistake on the part of the appellant/assessee that the aforesaid form could not be accepted before the due date of filing of return of income, secondly, the assessee/appellant had duly accepted the Form 10DDA before the return of income was processed by the CPC on 16.03.2023, thirdly, the Gujarat High Court, has on similar facts observed that although the furnishing of report for claiming the deduction/exemption is mandatory requirement, the mode and ITA No.5285/Del/2024 6 stage of filing thereof is a procedural aspect and if the requisite audit report is available with the assessing officer before the assessment order is framed, then the claim of deduction cannot be denied to the assessee/appellant, even if the audit report may not have been filed along with the return of income. 10. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed 11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 9. In view of the above material facts and well settled principles of law, respectfully following the judicial precedents, it is held that the ld. AO wrongly rejected the claim of deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act for belated filing of Form 10DA. Therefore, grounds of appeal No.1 to 2.3 are allowed. The impugned orders of the CIT(A) and AO are set aside. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant-assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 16.05.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 16th May, 2025. dk Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "