SHANKARLAL KUNDANMAL PARIK,KOLHAPUR V. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

ITA 400/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shankarlal Kundanmal Parik, the appellant, who contested the denial of a deduction under section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, amounting to Rs.1,07,52,570. The deduction was initially denied by the Centralized Processing Center (CPC) due to the revised return being filed after the due date, which was mistakenly treated as the original return. The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad upheld this decision. However, the appellant argued that the original return was filed on time, and this fact was overlooked by both the CPC and the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A). The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument and remanded the case for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the need to acknowledge the timely filing of the original return.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 396605 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MILIND DEBAJE
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD S. SHINGTE
• Keywords: Revised return; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.400/PUN/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Shankarlal Kundanmal Parik, 10/276, Kapad Market, Ichalkaranji- 416115. PAN : ABIPP0423H Vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Kolhapur. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.12.2024 passed by Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad for the assessment year 2022-23. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, Lower Authorities have erred in disallowing claim of deduction u/s 80-IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the sum of Rs.1,07,52,570/-, in the intimation passed u/s 143(1)(a) of the Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Milind Debaje Date of hearing : 23.04.2025 Date of pronouncement : 26.05.2025 ITA No.400/PUN/2025 2 Income Tax Act. 1961 which was in consequence to revised return filed by the appellant, by assuming that return of income is filed belatedly, whereas it is your appellants submission that original return of income was submitted by your appellant on 20/10/2022 vide acknowledgement no 738841421201022. In view of this your appellant is entitled to claim deduction u/s 80- IA for sum of Rs. 1,07,52,570/-. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, learned Assessing Officer has erred in not computing the alternative minimum tax for which your appellant is entitled, your appellant prays for giving suitable instruction to compute the income as per the provision of laws. 3. Your appellant prays for deletion of entire addition. Your appellant craves for to add, alter amend, modify, delete any or all grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing in the interest of natural justice.” 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual deriving income from proprietorship business as well as income as partner from partnership firm and also income from other sources and has furnished its original return of income on 20.10.2022. Subsequently, a revised return was also furnished on 13.12.2022. The subsequent return was processed by CPC u/s 143(1) vide intimation order dated 07.08.2023, wherein deduction u/s 80IA of Rs.1,07,52,570/- was denied and refund claimed by the assessee was converted into demand of Rs.44,52,480/-. ITA No.400/PUN/2025 3 4. After considering the reply furnished by the assessee Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee by observing as under :- “4.0 Determination & Decision :- Keeping in view, the aforesaid factual and legal position, the appeal filed by the appellant is being decided on the basis of documents available on record. The statement of facts, grounds of appeal, order appealed against and written submissions have been thoroughly examined. The central issue for adjudication among all the grounds of appeal no. 01 to 05 raised pertains to the sole issue of denying the benefit of Section 801A of the Act. Therefore, all grounds of appeal no. 01 to 05 are being clubbed and adjudicated together. 4.1 The appellant submitted that it had filed its ITR on 13/12/2022 and e-filed Form-10CCB on 21/09/2022. In this context, it's important to note that the appellant had claimed deduction u/s 801A of the Act amounting to Rs.1,07,52,570/- while filing the return of income. However, to avail the benefit of deduction u/s 801A, Form-10CCB was required to be filed before the due date of filing ITR as per Rule 18BBB and Section 801A of the Act. The appellant had e-filed Form- 10CCB on 21/09/2022, which is before filing of return on 13/12/2022; however, it may be appreciated that the ITR has been filed late, as the extended due date to file the Return was 07/11/2022. Therefore, one of the conditions for claiming deduction u/s 801A vis-à-vis 'the return of income is to be submitted in time' has not been fulfilled by the appellant. 4.2 In view of the above, I find no error in the AO's decision to disallow the appellant's claim for deduction under Section 801A of the Act, when processing the return under Section 143(1) of the Act.” 5. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad is ITA No.400/PUN/2025 4 unjustified. Ld. AR submitted before the bench that the assessee has installed wind mills for which deduction u/s 80IA of Rs.1,07,52,570/- was claimed. It was also submitted that the assessee is entitled to claim this deduction for a period of 10 consecutive assessment years and this is not the first year when the assessee has claimed such deduction u/s 80IA of the IT Act. In support of claim of deduction made by the assessee u/s 80IA for earlier and subsequent years, Ld. AR relied on intimation issued for assessment year 2018-19 to assessment year 2024-25 wherein the deduction u/s 80IA of the IT Act was allowed. Ld. AR submitted before us that the assessee has furnished original return of income within time i.e. on 20.10.2022 and thereafter a revised return was also furnished on 13.12.2022. Ld. AR further submitted that it appears that the CPC has not considered original return filed by the assessee u/s 139(1) of the IT Act and treated the revised return as original one which was filed on 13.12.2022. And accordingly, CPC was of the view that since the return of income has not been filed within the time allowed u/s 139(1) of the IT Act it disallowed the deduction claimed under Chapter VI-A i.e. u/s ITA No.400/PUN/2025 5 80IA of the IT Act in the light of section 80AC of the IT Act. Ld. AR further submitted that Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad also did not acknowledge the fact of filing original return in time and only considered the revised return which was filed on 13.12.2022. Accordingly, Ld. AR submitted before the bench that the fact of filing of original return in time was not acknowledged either by CPC or by Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad which resulted in denial of claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the IT Act made by the assessee. Accordingly, Ld. AR prayed before the bench set-aside the order passed by Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad and further requested to direct CPC to allow the claim made by the assessee u/s 80IA of the IT Act. 7. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue submitted before us that it appears that the assessee has not brought the fact of filing of original return within the time limit prescribed u/s 139(1) of the IT Act before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad. Ld. DR in this regard referred the copy of written submission furnished by the assessee before Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad wherein no discussion was made by the assessee with regard to original return ITA No.400/PUN/2025 6 filed by the assessee. Accordingly, Ld. DR requested before the bench to remand the matter back to the file of Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad to decide the issue afresh in the light of fact of filing original return by the assessee within time limit prescribed u/s 139(1) of the IT Act. 8. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the copy of ITR-V with regard to filing of original return on 12.10.2022. In this regard, we find that admittedly the assessee has installed windmills and therefore he is entitled to claim deduction u/s 80IA of the IT Act which the assessee is already claiming in preceding years as well as in subsequent years. We also find that in the impugned intimation CPC has treated the processed ITR as the original one and therefore obviously the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80IA was disallowed since the impugned return was filed on 13.12.2022 i.e. beyond the time limit prescribed u/s 139(1) of the IT Act. It is the submission of Ld. AR that from the perusal of ITR-V i.e. the acknowledgement of original return, which is dated 12.10.2022 it is crystal clear that the original return was filed well ITA No.400/PUN/2025 7 within time and therefore the assessee was entitled to claim deduction u/s 80IA of the IT Act. It is the submission of Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the assessee has furnished copy of income tax portal wherein filing of original return of income as well as revised return of income is evident. Considering the totality of the facts of the case, we find force in the arguments of Ld. counsel of the assessee that the whole controversy arises due to the fact that filing of original return of income well within time as prescribed u/s 139(1) of the IT Act was not acknowledged either by CPC or by Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad which resulted in denial of deduction u/s 80IA of the IT Act. At the same time, we also take into consideration the argument advanced by Ld. DR that the fact of filing of original income tax return well within time was not brought to the knowledge of Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad which compelled him to confirm the intimation order passed by CPC wherein deduction u/s 80IA was disallowed. Under these circumstances, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad and remand the matter back to him with a direction to decide the appeal afresh and as per fact & ITA No.400/PUN/2025 8 law in the light of fact of filing of original return of income within time limit prescribed u/s 139(1) of the IT Act. He may, if feel necessary, call for a remand report from the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer regarding the filing of the original return and the revised return. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 26th day of May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (R. K. PANDA) (VINAY BHAMORE) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 26th May, 2025. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad. 4. The Pr. CIT/CIT concerned. 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "