Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The ITR was processed under section 143(1) of the IT Act and claim of deduction under section 80JJAA of IT Act had been rejected by CPC for reason that assessee failed to file Form 10DA within prescribed time provided under the Statute;

The Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal held that it was only because of procedural lapse/mistake on part of assessee that aforesaid Form 10DA could not be filed within the due dates provided under the IT Act. However, since the assessee had duly accepted Form 10DA before return of income was processed by CPC hence the deduction claimed under section 80JJAA of the IT Act should not be denied.

The process of filing of Form 10DA includes both uploading by CA and acceptance by the appellant together and if either of the process is not completed within the stipulated time, the same does not equale with filing of Form 10DA within due date. Under the statute, it was mandatory to file the said Form 10DA within the prescribed time, failing which will make the appellant ineligible for claiming deduction u/s ITA.No.1165/Hyd./2025 80JJAA of the Act. Since, in the instant case, the process of filing Form 10DA was completed on 29.11.2023 e. after the extended due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1), the claim of deduction u/s 80JJAA of the Act is not admissible.

(ii) The appellant has failed to file Form 10DA within due date.

It is seen that the appellant has filed its return u/s 139(1) and Form 10DA belated i,e. after due date. In this regard, it is pertinent to point out that the appellant files its regular return of income. It is clear that the appellant was duly aware of the entire process of filing of the said Form 10DA. If such disregard is allowed, it will make the governing provisions of the statute redundant and ineffective.

In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the AO CPC has rightly disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80JJAA as the Form 10DA was not filed within prescribed time. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is dismissed."

5.2. Thus, in sub-para-(i) of Para-7.1 the learned CIT(A) has stated that the report was uploaded by the C.A. on 29.11.2023 i.e., before the extended due date of filing the return of income but the same was not considered as compliance of filing Form-10DA as per the I.T. Rules, 1962 as the assessee has not verified the said report before the due date of filing the same. The learned CIT(A) one hand has accepted the report uploaded by the C.A. on 29.11.2023 as before the extended due date whereas on the other hand stated that the process of filing Form 10DA was completed on 29.11.2023 which is after the extended due date. Therefore, there are some contradictory observations/statements made by learned CIT(A) in the impugned order. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, when the fact of ITA.No.1165/Hyd./2025 uploading the report in Form-10DA before the extended due date of filing the return of income is not in dispute then, the non-verification on the part of the assessee is a procedural non-compliance/lapse on the part of the assessee. Since this matter was not examined by the Assessing Officer but the claim of the assessee was disallowed by the CPC while processing the return of income, therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is remanded to the record of the Assessing Officer for verification of the relevant facts and then adjudication of the issue as per law, after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee, before passing the fresh order.