Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: Form 10DA in Pratap Technocrats Private Limited, ... vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 18 July, 2023Matching Fragments
4. On culmination of the assessment proceeding the ld. PCIT called for the assessment record and the ld. PCIT observed that the assessee had claimed deduction u/s. 80JJAA of the Act amounting to Rs. 3,01,18,395/-. The ld. PCIT also observed that the assessee had furnished Form 10DA on 05.02.2019. As per provisions of section 80JJAA, the Form 10DA should have been filed along with the return of income which was filed on 31.10.2018. Based on these facts the ld. PCIT noted that the form should have been treated as defective and deduction claimed by Pratap Technocrats Pvt. Ltd.
3.1 Form 10DA for claiming deduction u/s 80JJAA was filed on 05.02.2019, whereas, Form 10DA ought to be have filed along with the return of income i.e. 31.10.2018. Therefore, deduction claimed should have been disallowed.
3.2 CPC, during processing of return u/s 143(1), made adjustment of Rs. 5,61,32,750 to the total income. However, the same was not taken into consideration by the NFAC during passing of final assessment order u/s 143(3).
4. SUBMISSIONS 4.1 FIRST ISSUE - DELAY IN FILING FORM NO. 10DA FOR CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 80JJAA Pratap Technocrats Pvt. Ltd.
4.1.i It is submitted that Form 10DA was filed on 05.02.2019,i.e. after the date of filing of return of income, but within the time allowed u/s
139. 4.1.ii Assessee company filed Form 10DA, even before receiving the notice u/s 143(2). Hence, before the order was passed on 29.03.2021, Form 10DA was on record.
4.1.iiiHence, assessee company was entitled for claiming deduction u/s 80JJAA. It is pertinent to note that the requirement of filing Form 10DA, along with return of income is directory and not mandatory.
order of the FAO cannot be considered as erroneous or prejudicial. The co-ordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of Annu Agrotech Private Limited in ITA NO. 09/JP/2021 already taken a view that in case of limited scrutiny, scope of examination of the AO is restricted towards the reasons for which the case of the assessee was selected. AO cannot proceed to examine the issues, which are beyond the scope of the limited scrutiny. As regards the filling of the Form 10DA before the completion of the assessment the ld. AR placed on reliance on the various decision including the jurisdictional high court that the if the assessee files the form before completion of the assessment the resultant benefit cannot be denied. In the light of this facts so far as on the issue of form no. 10DA we do not find merits in the finding of the ld. PCIT and as regards the second issue the matter was already litigated before the ITAT and the resultant order has passed and therefore, we are of the view that the issues which are already settled on those issues there cannot be applied the provision of the section 263 of the Act. Not only that the order has been passed in this case by NeAC where there are as much as four units i.e. Assessment unit, Verification unit, Technical unit and Review unit.