What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction of the business expenses of Rs. 8.62 lakhs, noting that the incurring of these expenses was not in dispute. The order was to be rectified accordingly.

The assessee claimed business expenses of Rs. 8,62,458/- in their return of income. However, these expenses were not considered due to a technical error in the software used for filing the Income Tax Return.

What were the issues?

Whether business expenses not considered due to a technical glitch in ITR filing software should be allowed as a deduction.

Chandulal Ramchandra Kanjani, Na vs Arivs.Income Tax Officer, Ward 1… | ITAT Surat 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT “SMC BENCH, SURAT

Before: DR. BRR KUMAR & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr. DR

Hearing: 21.01.2026Pronounced: 07.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT “SMC BENCH, SURAT BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1258/Srt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2007-08) Chandulal Ramchandra Kanjani, Vs. Income Tax Officer B-2, Vaibhav Apartment, Opp. Nagar Ward-1, Palika Building Dudhiya Talav, Navsari Navsari, Gujarat-396445 [PAN No. ACHPK2750Q] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Rasesh Shah, CA Appellant by : Respondent by: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 07.04.2026 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), ADDL/JCIT(A)-8, Delhi on 30.09.2024 for A.Y. 2007-08.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case, as well as the law on subject, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not condoning the delay in filing of appeal before Ld. CIT(A). 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the deduction of business expenses of Rs. 8,62,458/- to be claimed as deduction against business receipts when there was technical error in the software used for filing of ITR of current year. 3. It is therefore prayed that disallowance of deduction made by the assessing officer and confirmed by CIT(A) may please be deleted. 4. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of assessment proceedings.”

ITA No. 1258/Srt/2024 Chandulal Ramchandra Kanjani vs. ITO Asst. Year –2007-08 - 2–

The assessee filed return of income declaring an amount of Rs. 9,76,410/- which was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. It was submitted that the assessee has claimed expenses of Rs. 8,62,458/- which could not be considered by the persons concerned going to the technical default.

Since the factum of the incurring of business expenses is not in dispute in the interest of justice, we direct the Assessing Officer to give effect to the business expenses of Rs. 8.62 lakhs and the order to be rectified accordingly.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced under proviso to Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 07/04/2026

Sd/- Sd/- (DR. BRR KUMAR) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 07/04/2026 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��थ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सूरत / DR, ITAT, Surat 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सूरत / ITAT, Surat

Date of dictation 06.04.2026 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 06.04.2026 3. Other Member………………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S .04.2026 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 07.04.2026 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 07.04.2026 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 07.04.2026 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order……………………………………

CHANDULAL RAMCHANDRA KANJANI,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments