Jata Auto Ancillary, Salem V. ACIT Circle1, Salem

ITA 2722/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7319 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 24-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: T S LAKSHMI VENKATRAMAN
• Section: 80IA; 139

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , A BENCH, CHENNAI [ , , BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.2722/CHNY/2018 ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) M/S. JATA AUTO ANCILLARY, NO.2/50-F, SRI RAMASUNDARA BHAVAN, REDDIYUR, SALEM 636 004. VS THE ACIT, CIRCLE 1, SALEM PAN: AADFJ8649K ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI T.S. LAKSHMI VENKATRAMAN, FCA / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 11.06.2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.07.2019 / O R D E R PER S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), SALEM IN APPEAL NO.250/2013-14 DATED 25.04.2018 AGAINST THE INTIMATION U/S.143(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2 ITA NOS.2722/CHNY/2018 2. M/S. JATA AUTO ANCILLARY, THE ASSESSEE, FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 ON 12.01.2012, WHILE THE DUE DATE FOR FILING THE RETURN WAS 30.09.2011. IN THE RETURN, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S.80IA OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, CPC, BANGALORE THOUGH TRANSFERRED THE RECTIFICATION RIGHTS TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE INTIMATION BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THAT ORDER, THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS APPEAL. 3. THE LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CPC REJECTED THE ASSESSEES DEDUCTION U/S.80IA OF THE ACT, SINCE THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN ON 12.01.2012 WHICH IS BEYOND THE DUE DATE OF 30.09.2011 IN TERMS OF SECTION 139(1) OF THE ACT. THE CPC IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THE DISALLOWANCE U/S.143(1) OF THE ACT. AGAINST THE INTIMATION U/S.143(1) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE FILED A RECTIFICATION REQUEST ON 24.06.2013. THE CPC FORWARDED THE RECTIFICATION RIGHTS TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. TILL THE DATE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EXERCISED HIS RECTIFICATION RIGHTS. THEREFORE, THE CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL. THE DEDUCTION U/S.80-IAB OF THE ACT, IS A BENEFICIAL PROVISION. IT HAS TO BE VIEWED LIBERALLY AND TECHNICALITIES SHOULD NOT COME IN ITS WAY. 3 ITA NOS.2722/CHNY/2018 4. PER CONTRA, THE LD.DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND HE RELIED ON THE FOLLOWING PORTION OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A):- QUOTE DEDUCTION NOT TO BE ALLOWED UNLESS RETURN FURNISHED 80AC WHERE IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF AN ASSESSEE OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR COMMENCING ON THE 1 ST DAY OF APRIL, 2006 OR ANY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR, ANY DEDUCTION IS ADMISSIBLE UNDER SECTION 80IA OR SECTION 80-IAB OR SECTION 80-IB OR SECTION 80-IC [OR SECTION 80-ID OR SECTION 80- IE], NO SUCH DEDUCTION SHALL BE ALLOWED TO HIM UNLESS HE FURNISHED A RETURN OF HIS INCOME FOR SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR ON OR BEFORE THE DUE DATE SPECIFIED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 139. 5. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IT IS CLEAR FROM THE INTIMATION U/S.143(1) OF THE ACT, DATED 20.03.2012, THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ITS RETURN BEFORE THE DUE DATE SPECIFIED UNDER SUB-SECTION 1 OF SECTION 139 OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 I.E., 30.09.2011. INSTEAD, IT FILED ITS RETURN ON 12.01.2012 ONLY. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S.80IA OF THE ACT, WHICH IS GOVERNED BY PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80AC. FROM THE ABOVE FACTS READ WITH SECTION 80AC EXTRACTED ABOVE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER, CPC, BANGALORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RIGHTLY NOT CONSIDERED THE CLAIM 4 ITA NOS.2722/CHNY/2018 MADE U/S.80IA OF THE ACT. THEREFORE WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A). 7. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 23 RD JULY, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- /CHENNAI, /DATED 23 RD JULY, 2019 RSR /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ( ) /CIT(A) 4. /CIT 5. /DR 6. [ /GF ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) (S. JAYARAMAN) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER