Readylink Internet Services Limited, Coimbatore V. ACIT,

ITA 329/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 95771 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 04-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 09-02-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A B KALI
• Assessee Lawyers: VIJAYA KUMAR C A

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . , . ! '# , $ % BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.329/MDS./2015 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2012-13 ) M/S.READYLINK INTERNET SERVICES LTD., PLOTNO.7,SAKTHI COLONY, R.K.PURAM, GANAPATHY, COIMBATORE 641 006. VS. ACIT, CENTRALIZED PROCESING CENTER, P.B.NO.2, ELECTONIC CITY POST OFFICE, BANGALORE 560 100. PAN AACCR 2799 C ( &' / APPELLANT ) ( ()&' / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : MR.VIJAYAKUMAR,C.A / RESPONDENT BY : MR.A B KALI, JCIT, D.R / DATE OF HEARING : 04.08.2015 ! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.08.2015 * / O R D E R PER A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: ITA NO. 329/MDS/15 2 THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, AGGRIEVED B Y THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A)-I, COIMB ATORE DATED 13.01.2015 IN ITA NO.369/13-14 PASSED UNDER SEC.143 (1) READ WITH SECTION SEC. 250 OF THE ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED TWO ELABORATE GROUNDS I N ITS APPEAL; HOWEVER THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A), WHO HAD NOT ALLOWED A SSESSEES CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S.80-IA OF THE ACT MERELY ON THE GROUND THAT THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS NOT FILED WITHIN DUE DATE PRESCRIBED U/S .139 (1) OF THE ACT. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY, ENGAGED IN THE BUS INESS OF PROVIDING BROADBAND NETWORK CONNECTIONS AND INTERNE T SERVICES, FILED ITS E-RETURN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ON 08 .10.2012 ADMITTING IS INCOME AS ` 26,64,030/- UNDER REGULAR PROVISIONS AND RS.37,54,920/- U/S.115JB OF THE ACT AFTER CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S.80-IA OF THE ACT. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED AND AN INTIMATION U/S.143(1) DATED 07.10.2013 WHEREIN THE LD. A.O(CP C) DISALLOWED ITA NO. 329/MDS/15 3 THE DEDUCTION U/S. 80-IA OF THE ACT AMOUNTING TO ` 11,26,476/- ON THE GROUND THAT THE RETURN WAS FILED AFTER THE DUE DATE PRESCRIBED U/S.139(1) OF THE ACT. 4. ON APPEAL AGAINST THE INTIMATION U/S.143(1) PAS SED BY THE ACIT(CPU), BANGALORE, THE LD. CIT(A), THE LD. CIT(A ) DENIED THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S.80-IA OF THE ACT BY OBSERVIN G AS UNDER:- 6. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT. AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 8OAC, WHERE IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF AN ASSESSEE OF THE PR EVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR COMMENCING ON THE 1 ST DAY OF APRIL 2006 OR ANY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR, ANY DEDUCTI ON IS ADMISSIBLE UNDER SECTION 801A OF SECTION 80-IA B OR SECTION 801B OR SECTION 80IC (OR SECTION 8OLD OR SECTION 801E) N O SUCH, DEDUCTION SHALL BE ALLOWED TO HIM UNLESS HE FURNISH ES A RETURN OF HIS INCOME FOR SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR ON OR BEFORE THE DU E DATE SPECIFIED UNDER SUB SECTION OF SECTION 139) 7. AS SEEN FROM FACTS, THE APPELLANT DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS MENTIONED IN SECTION 8OAC AND THE ASSESS EE HAS RELIED ON THE FOLLOWING JUDICIAL DECISIONS: ( I) M/S. UNITECH LIMITED VS ACIT (ITA NO. 1014/DEL./ 2012) (II) SHRI S. VENKATAIAH IN ITA NO.984/HYD/2011 DATE D 31.05.2012 (III) DHIR GLOBAL INDIA (P) LTD. 133 TTJ 590 (DEL ) ITA NO. 329/MDS/15 4 8. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPEL LANT. IN MY OPINION, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM THE JUDICIAL DECISIONS RELIED ON BY THE APPELLANT. IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT, THE RETURN ITSELF WAS NOT FILED WITHIN THE DUE DATE SPECIFIED U/S 139(1) OF T HE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE DISALLOWANCE OF 801A CLAIM IS AS PER LAW. THE G ROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE DISMISSED. 5. BEFORE US, THE LD. A.R. REITERATED THE SUBMISSI ONS MADE BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). THE LD. D.R ON THE OTHER HAND ARGUE D IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) AND CITING THE DECISIO N OF THE ITAT SPECIAL BENCH IN ITA NO.397/RJT/2009 ([2013] 140 ITD 006(SB) ) IN THE CASE OF M/S.SAFFIRE GARMENTS VS. ITO VIDE ORDER DAT ED 30.12.2012 ARGUED THAT NO DEDUCTION SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO AN AS SESSEE WHO HAS FAILED TO FILE THE RETURN OF INCOME WITHIN THE DUE DATE PRESCRIBED U/S.139(1) OF THE ACT. 6. WE FIND THIS ISSUE IS ELABORATELY DISCUSSED IN THE CASE OF M/S.SAFFIRE GARMENTS VS. ITO SUPRA, AND HELD AGAINS T THE ASSESSEE. WHILE DOING SO, THE SPECIAL BENCH CONCLUDED IN ITS ORDER THAT PROVISIONS OF THE PROVISO TO SEC.10A(1A) ARE MANDA TORY AND NOT DIRECTORY, THUS DEDUCTION U/S.10A(1A) COULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO AN ASSESSEE WHO FAILS TO FURNISH A RETURN OF INCOME ON OR BEFORE THE DUE ITA NO. 329/MDS/15 5 DATE SPECIFIED U/S.139(1) OF THE ACT. THE RELEVANT HELD PORTION OF THE ITAT SPECIAL BENCH ORDER IS REPRODUCED HEREIN BELOW FOR READY REFERENCE:- HELD:- THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO FILE THE RETUR N OF INCOME WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 139(1). THIS PROVISION OF SECTION 139(1) WAS APPLIC ABLE TO ALL COMPANIES AND FIRMS IRRESPECTIVE OF THE FACT AS TO WHETHER THEY ARE EARNING TAXABLE INCOME OR NOT FOR THE CURRENT Y EAR. IT WAS FOUND THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE PROVISO TO SECTION 10A(1A) WAS NOTHING BUT A CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF THE ASSESSE E TO FILE THE RETURN OF INCOME WITHIN THE DUE DATE PRESCRIBED U/S 139(1). FOR SUCH A FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE TO FILE HIS RETURN O F INCOME WITHIN THE DUE DATE PRESCRIBED U/S 139(1), THIS IS NOT THE ONLY CONSEQUENCE. ONE CONSEQUENCE OF SUCH FAILURE IS PRE SCRIBED IN SECTION 234A ALSO AS PER WHICH, THE ASSESSEE IS LIA BLE TO PAY INTEREST ON THE TAX PAYABLE BY HIM AFTER REDUCING A DVANCE TAX AND TDS/TCS IF ANY PAID BY HIM APART FROM SOME OTHE R REDUCTIONS. IT WAS HELD THAT THE INTEREST PAYABLE B Y THE ASSESSEE U/S.234A WAS FOR HIS FAILURE TO FILE THE ROI WITHIN THE DUE DATE PRESCRIBED U/S.139(1). THIS WAS BY NOW A SETTLED P OSITION OF LAW THAT CHARGING OF INTEREST UNDER VARIOUS SECTIONS IN CLUDING U/S 234A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, WAS MANDATORY. IT WAS HELD THAT WHEN ONE OF THE CONSEQUENCES FOR NOT FILING RE TURN OF INCOME WITHIN THE DUE DATE PRESCRIBED U/S 139(1) WAS MANDA TORY THEN, ITA NO. 329/MDS/15 6 OTHER CONSEQUENCE OF THE SAME FAILURE OF THE ASSESS EE COULD NOT BE DIRECTORY AND THE SAME WAS ALSO MANDATORY. --- --- RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF ITAT SPECIAL BENCH IN M/S.SAFFIRE GARMENTS VS. ITO CITED SUPRA , WE DO NOT FIND ANY HESITATION TO CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) A ND ALSO THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY HIM IN HIS ORDER. ACCORDINGLY THIS APP EAL IS HELD IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 06 TH AUGUST, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ! '# ) (V. DURGA RAO) ( . ) (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 06 TH AUGUST, 2015. K S SUNDARAM. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT (A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE