2024 (8) TMI 1171 - AT - Income Tax

Deduction u/s 80IA - filing of return of income belatedly - HELD THAT - As relying on case CIT v/s Shelcon Propertyies (P) Ltd 2015 (3) TMI 579 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT we hold that once the return of income has been filed belatedly, no benefit under section 80IA of the Act is allowed. Decided in favour of revenue.

Issues Involved:
1. Timeliness of the return of income filed on 01.12.2014.
2. Validity of the revised return filed on 10.09.2015 under section 139(5).
3. Eligibility for deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
4. Classification of the assessee as a contractor or sub-contractor.
5. Contradictory claims by the assessee regarding joint ventures and sub-contracting.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Timeliness of the Return of Income Filed on 01.12.2014:
The Revenue contended that the return of income filed on 01.12.2014 was not within the time limit prescribed under section 139(1), as the due date was 30.11.2014. The learned CIT(A) held that since 30.11.2014 was a Sunday, the return filed on 01.12.2014 was within the time limit. However, the Tribunal referenced the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in CIT v/s Shelcon Properties (P) Ltd., which emphasized that the due date specified under section 139(1) must be strictly adhered to. Consequently, the return filed on 01.12.2014 was deemed belated.

2. Validity of the Revised Return Filed on 10.09.2015 under Section 139(5):
The Revenue argued that since the original return was not filed within the due date, it could not be validly revised under section 139(5). The Tribunal concurred, citing the precedent set in SMS Infrastructure Ltd. v/s DCIT, which stated that no deduction under section 80IA would be allowed if the return of income is filed belatedly. Thus, the revised return filed on 10.09.2015 was invalid.

3. Eligibility for Deduction under Section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
The Revenue contended that the assessee was not eligible for the deduction under section 80IA(4) because the return was filed after the due date, and as per section 80AC, no deduction is allowed unless the return is filed before the due date specified in section 139(1). The Tribunal upheld this view, referencing the Calcutta High Court judgment which stressed that the benefits under section 80IA can only be claimed if the return is filed within the prescribed period. Therefore, the assessee was not entitled to the deduction under section 80IA(4).

4. Classification of the Assessee as a Contractor or Sub-Contractor:
The Revenue argued that the assessee was a sub-contractor working under a principal contractor, M/s Doshin Veolia Water Solution Pvt Ltd, and hence, not entitled to the deduction under section 80IA(4)(b). The Tribunal did not delve deeply into this issue, as the primary grounds regarding the timeliness of the return and the validity of the revised return were sufficient to decide the appeal.

5. Contradictory Claims by the Assessee Regarding Joint Ventures and Sub-Contracting:
The Revenue highlighted that the assessee had entered into a joint venture for certain projects but also claimed deductions as a sub-contractor for the same projects. The Tribunal did not address this issue in detail, as the appeal was decided based on the primary grounds concerning the timeliness and validity of the returns.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the return of income filed on 01.12.2014 was belated, and therefore, the revised return filed on 10.09.2015 was invalid. Consequently, the assessee was not entitled to the deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue were allowed, and the appeal filed by the Revenue was partly allowed. The Tribunal did not find it necessary to delve into the other issues on merit due to the decision on the primary grounds.

← Previous Next →