DEVARSONS INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE D.C.I.T. CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 2327/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 September 2026AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee, Devarsons Industries Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, dated 14.05.2026, for Assessment Year 2018-19. The appeal concerned the denial of deduction claimed under Section 35(2AB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for expenditure on in-house Research and Development. The sole reason for denial was the alleged failure of the assessee to submit the prescribed Form No. 3CL, issued by the Department of Scientific & Industrial Research & Technology. The assessee contended that Form 3CL was duly furnished after receiving notices from the CIT(A).

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Form 3CL furnished by the assessee required verification at the end of the Assessing Officer (AO). Consequently, the impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside. The matter was restored to the file of the AO for the limited purpose of verifying the authenticity and correctness of Form 3CL. The Tribunal clarified that it would be open for the assessee to contest the quantum of deduction admissible under the law in relation to the furnished Form 3CL. The AO was directed to decide this limited issue in accordance with the law after the verification. The Tribunal did not decide the ultimate allowability of the deduction.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee had duly furnished the prescribed Form No. 3CL to the authorities, as required for claiming deduction under Section 35(2AB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that it had indeed furnished Form 3CL. It pointed to notices issued by the CIT(A) under Section 250 of the Act, requesting the form, and submitted that it had responded by uploading the required document. The assessee further stated that a copy of Form 3CL, issued by the Joint Secretary for and on behalf of the Secretary, DSIR, New Delhi, was on record. The assessee alleged that the CIT(A) rejected the appeal mechanically without considering the evidence provided. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue before the Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 35(2AB),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & SHRI GANGADHAR PANDA

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, Advocate, Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr. D.R
For Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr. D.R
Pronounced: 29/09/2026

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as “NFAC”), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”), dated 14.05.2026 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018-19. ITA No.2327/Ahd/2026 [Devarsons Industries Pvt. Ltd. v

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 35(2AB)

All 841 judgments and leading authorities on Section 35(2AB) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →