DCIT, CEBTRAL CIRCLE 2(4) KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. IDEAL HEIGHTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal:

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed the return of income for the AY 2017-18 on 29.10.2017 declaring the total income at ₹10,06,060/-. The assessee engaged in the business as a promoter and builder, had claimed a deduction u/s 80-IB of the Act amounting to ₹2,07,03,222/- on its phase-1 project. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO') requested supporting documents for the said claim. The Ld. AO observed that the assessee had failed to furnish the requisite verifiable documents and make complete compliance, and rejected the claim of the deduction u/s 80-IB of the Act and completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act, determining the total income of the assessee at ₹2,17,09,280/- after making a disallowance of ₹2,07,03,222/- for the deduction claimed. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who observed that the assessee had fulfilled the statutory requirement by uploading Form No. 10CCB Assessment Year(s) 2017-18 and the tax audit report on 27.10.2017, well within the time allowed u/s 139(1) of the Act and prior to the filing of the return of income. After calling for the remand report from the Ld. AO and reviewing the submissions, the Ld. CIT(A) found that the Ld. AO had failed to consider the specific documents already on record. Noting that the assessee had discharged its onus and that similar claims were allowed by the Department in the preceding and the subsequent assessment years, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the claim of deduction u/s 80-IB of the Act was legitimate. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the Ld. AO and allowed the appeal of the assessee.

Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue has filed the appeal before the Tribunal.

Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made have been examined. The Ld. DR drew our attention to the last para of the assessment order and stated that since the assessee had failed to furnish any supporting documentary evidence in support of the claim of deduction u/s 80-IB of the Act amounting to ₹2,07,03,766/- despite several opportunities being granted, therefore, the Ld. AO had rightly disallowed the claim u/s 80-IB of the Act. The Ld. AR countered by stating that the assessee had duly filed the audit report in Form No. 10CCB, the acknowledgement of which is at page 14 of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the same was filed on 27.10.2017 vide e-filing acknowledgement number 261965281271017. It is stated that the Tax Audit Report was also filed in time and in the earlier as well as the subsequent year the assessee qualified for the claim of deduction u/s 80-IB of the Act. It was also mentioned that Form No. 3CA relating to Tax Audit Report was also filed in time and the same also mentions the ITA No(s). 62/KOL/2026 Assessment Year(s) 2017-18 figure of the deduction claimed u/s 80-IB of the Act. Our attention was drawn to page 10 para 2.9 and 2.10 of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and he stated that the required statutory compliance had been made, therefore, the claim was justified.

We have considered the submissions made, gone through the facts of the case and perused the record and the order of the Ld. CIT(A). The claim u/s 80-IB of the Act was denied because the required audit report in Form No. 10CCB was not filed. However, the assessee claims to have filed the same in time and the required evidence was also submitted before the Ld. CIT(A). Since the disallowance was made only on account of the failure of the assessee to file the audit report which fact is disputed by the assessee by filing the required evidence, therefore, there is no justification for interfering with the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) whose order is confirmed and Ground Nos. 1 and 2 are dismissed.

Ground No. 3 is general in nature and does not require any separate adjudication.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22nd June, 2026. [George Mathan] [Rakesh Mishra] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 22.06.2026 Bidhan (Sr. P.S.)

CIT-

CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.

Guard File. //// By order