9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
The issues involved in this case are: 1. Denial of deduction u/s 80-IB of the Income Tax Act for A.Y. 2009-10. 2. Justification for delayed submission of the assessee's Return for A.Y. 2009-10. 3. Interpretation of Section 80AC of the Income Tax Act regarding the submission of Return within the due date specified in Sec.139(1). 4. Liberal interpretation of incentive provisions for promoting growth and development. Issue 1: Denial of Deduction u/s 80-IB: The appellant, engaged in construction of Housing Projects, filed its return for A.Y. 2009-10 claiming deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. The AO denied the claim citing non-filing within the time limit u/s 139(1). The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the denial, emphasizing the mandatory nature of Section 80AC and the requirement to file the return within the due date specified. The appellant argued that the delay was due to professional inaptness and not negligence, supported by an affidavit from the Chartered Accountant. The Tribunal held that the belated filing of the return cannot be attributed to negligence on the part of the assessee, considering the technical default and procedural delay, and directed the AO to allow the deduction claimed u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. Issue 2: Justification for Delayed Submission of Return: The appellant's counsel argued that the delay in filing the return was due to circumstances beyond the assessee's control, such as the resignation of an employee entrusted with filing the return. The authorities below were urged to consider the general hardship relief granted in similar cases by other ITAT benches. The Tribunal found the delay to be bona fide and genuine, not rebutted by the authorities, and held that the time limit should not work punitively against the assessee, especially when advance tax was paid on time and all necessary documents were available for claiming the deduction. Issue 3: Interpretation of Section 80AC: The ld. CIT(A) had emphasized the duty-bound nature of "shall" in Section 80AC, linking it to the timely filing of returns for claiming deductions. However, the Tribunal held that the provision should not be punitive and should not deny relief intended by the Act. The Tribunal referred to case laws supporting the liberal interpretation of deduction claims even in cases of belated filing of returns, emphasizing the genuine nature of the delay and the professional dependency of the assessee. Issue 4: Liberal Interpretation of Incentive Provisions: The Tribunal highlighted the need for a liberal interpretation of incentive provisions aimed at promoting growth and development. It considered the circumstances leading to the delay in filing the return and the genuine efforts made by the assessee to comply with the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and directed the AO to accept the return as filed by the assessee and allow the claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the IT Act. In conclusion, the appeal of the assessee was allowed by the Tribunal on 19.04.2013.
|
