P & R ENGINEERING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED.,NEW DELHI V. CIRCLE 19(1), DELHI, DCIT, NEW DELHI, INDIA

ITA 4537/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves P & R Engineering Service Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which had confirmed the disallowance of a deduction claimed under Section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The deduction of INR 5,62,48,491 was initially disallowed by the Assessing Officer (AO) because the income tax return was filed belatedly on March 30, 2019, instead of the due date of October 31, 2018. The Tribunal admitted additional evidence showing that the CBDT had condoned the delay in filing the return, leading to the acceptance of the deduction claim.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 835711 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 22-07-2025
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs Vegetable products, 88 ITR 192
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR DHANESTA
• Assessee Lawyers: V. K. AGARWAL; HRITHIK LAMBA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Additional evidence; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 119(2)(b)

Judgement Text

"ITA No.4537/Del/2025 Page | 1 THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4537/Del/2025 [Assessment Year : 2018-19] P & R Engineering Service Pvt. Ltd., 89, Lok Nayak Apartment, Rohini Courts, S.O. Rohini Courts, North West Delhi, New Delhi- 110085. PAN-AACCP0484E Vs. DCIT Circle-19(1) New Delhi APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri V.K. Agarwal, AR & Shri Hrithik Lamba, Adv. Respondent by Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 03.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement 11.02.2026 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The present appeal is filed by assessee against the order dated 03.07.2025 of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”] in Appeal No. NFAC/2017-18/10031831 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising out of assessment order dated 11.02.2021 passed u/s 143(3) r. w. sections 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee has claimed deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act of INR 5,62,48,491/- which was disallowed by Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4537/Del/2025 Page | 2 the AO for the sole reason that the return of income was filed belatedly on 30.03.2019 though the same has to be filed upto 31.10.2018 in terms of the due date as per section 139(1) of the Act. Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the said disallowance and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:- 1. “That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred on facts and in law in confirming the assessment order which is against the provisions of the IT Act, 1961 and in violation of principles of natural justice. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law. the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income- 2 tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre is against the provisions of the IT Act, 1961 and in violation of principles of natural justice. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred on facts and in law in upholding the disallowance of deduction under Section 801A 3 amounting to 25,62,48,491/-, solely on the ground that the return of income was not filed u/s 139(1) as required u/s 80AC of the IT Act, 1961. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred on facts and in law in not considering the submission made before AO in respect of non- application of mind by the Ld. AO in completing the assessment. 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred on facts and in law in 5 ignoring the submissions made before him that the requirement u/s 80AC is directory and not mandatory. 6. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred on facts and in law in ignoring the submissions made before him that section 139(4) is an extension of section 139(1) and the ITR was duly filed within the time extended u/s 139(4). 7. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred on facts and in law in not considering the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Vegetable products, 88 ITR 192, which was specifically bought to his notice to emphasise that if there are two interpretations, the assessee is entitled to the one benefitting to it. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4537/Del/2025 Page | 3 8. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred on facts and in law in 8 ignoring the settled judicial principle that provisions intended for promoting economic growth have to be interpreted liberally. 9. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred on facts and in law in ignoring the case laws relied upon by the appellant. 10. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, OR withdraw any ground of appeal at the time of hearing.” 4. At the outset, before us, Ld.AR for the assessee filed an application under Rule 29 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, alongwith additional evidences requesting that the said evidence being crucial to the issue in hand therefore, the same be admitted. The evidence filed before us is the order of CBDT vide F.No.197/128/2021-ITA-1 dated 01.12.2025 and consequent order of ld. PCIT, Delhi-7 giving effect u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act to the order passed by CBDT condoning the delay in filing the Income tax return by the assessee for the assessment year before us. As per the approval by CBDT, delay in filing the return of income belatedly has been condoned therefore, the claim of the assessee of deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act is revived. 5. It is further seen that in the order passed by CBDT dated 01.12.2025 in para 3, it is stated that the condonation of delay in filing ITR will not amount to acceptance of claims made in the concerned ITR of the applicant and the AO shall deal with it on merits. Accordingly, Ld. Sr. DR prayed that the matter be sent to the file of AO for necessary verification of the claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act made by the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4537/Del/2025 Page | 4 6. Heard the contentions of both parties and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the additional evidences filed, we are of the considered view that these additional evidences filed by the assessee include approval letter of CBDT extending the due date of filing of return and consequent effect order passed by the PCIT condoning the delay in filing the return of income which both are goes to crucial to decide the issue before us, and since both the orders are subsequent to the date of order of ld. CIT(A) therefore, the assessee could not filed them before the lower authorities. Looking to these facts, we admit the additional evidences filed by the assessee. 7. All the grounds of appeal taken by assessee are regarding denial of deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act for the sole reason that return of income was filed beyond the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act. It is further observed that the AO in para 2 at page 2 of the assessment order stated that replies filed by the assessee found to be correct however, since the return of income was filed after due date therefore, he disallowed the deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act. It is further observed that it was not the first year of claim of deduction u/s 80 IA by the assessee and once the AO has accepted the claim by not finding any discrepancy in the details filed by the assessee and denied the same on technical default of delay in filing the return of income, it cannot be said that he has not examined the allowability of deduction u/s 80IA on the merits of the claim made by the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4537/Del/2025 Page | 5 8. In view of the fact that CBDT has condoned the delay in filing the return of income and effect order is passed by PCIT by following the directions of the CBDT where the return of income filed by the assessee on 30.03.2019 is treated as regular and valid return and therefore, the assessee is entitled for deduction u/s 80-IA of the Act. 9. Accordingly, we allow the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80-IA of the Act. All the Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are thus, allowed. 10. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 11.02.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (SUDHIR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 11.02.2026 *Amit Kumar, Sr.P.S* (MANISH AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT 6. Guard File ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "