M/S GRAVISS FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - CIRCLE 7(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI
| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ायपीठ, मुंबई |
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“G” BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
&
SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER
I.T.A. No. 3597/Mum/2025
Assessment Year: 2023-24
M/s. Graviss Foods Private Limited
Strand Cinema, C.S. No. 506
Arthur Bunder Road
Colaba
Mumbai - 400005
[PAN: AABCM6895P]
Vs
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 7(1)(1),
Mumbai
अपीलाथ/ (Appellant)
यथ/ (Respondent)
Assessee by :
Shri Mahesh O. Rajora, C.A.
Revenue by :
Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. D/R
सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 23/07/2025
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 31/07/2025
आदेश/O R D E R
PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/Addl./JCIT (A) – 4,
Delhi [hereinafter ‘the ld. CIT(A)’] dated 25/03/2025 pertaining to AY 2023-24. 2. The grievance of the assessee reads as under:-
“1. The Additional/ Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 4, Delhi
[hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)] erred in confirming the action of Deputy Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as the AO) in not granting deduction of Rs.10,39,644/- u/s 80JJAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act) as claimed by the Appellant in its return of income.
The Appellant submits that it satisfies the conditions prescribed u/s 80JJAA of the Act and accordingly is eligible to claim deduction of an amount equal to 30%
additional employee cost incurred by it during the previous year and immediately preceding year to previous year; hence the CIT(A) ought to have allowed deduction of Rs.10,39,644/- u/s 80JJAA of the Act.
I.T.A. No. 3597/Mum/2025
The CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO in not granting the deduction of Rs. 10,39,644/- u/s 80JJAA of the Act, on the ground that Appellant did not file Form No. 10DA on or before the specified date (i.e. 31.10.2023) u/s 44AB of the Act. The Appellant submits that it has filed Form No. 10DA on 29.11.2023 (i.e. after 31.10.2023 but before due date of filing return of income i.e. 30.11.2023).
The Appellant submits that delay in filing of Form No. 10DA is only a procedural defect and the CIT(A) ought to have allowed the deduction of Rs. 10,39,644/- u/s 80JJAA of the Act as claimed by the Appellant in its return of income.
The Appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter or vary all or any of the above grounds of appeal as they or their representatives may think fit.”
Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 30/11/2023 when the due date of filing the return of income was 30/10/2023. Accordingly, the assessee was supposed to file Form 10DA on 31/10/2023 whereas the same was filed on 29/11/2023. Thus, there was a delay in filing Form 10DA in support of the claim of deduction u/s 80JJA of the Act. The return was processed on 22/12/2023 and the deduction u/s 80JJA of the Act was denied by CPC, Bengaluru on the ground that Form 10DA was not filed on or before the specified date. 3.1. Assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but without any success. 4. Be that as it may, subsequently the return was selected for scrutiny assessment and while framing the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act vide order dated 23/03/2025, the AO allowed the claim of deduction u/s 80JJA of the Act making the present appeal infructuous. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous. Order pronounced in the Court on 31st July, 2025 at Mumbai. (ANIKESH BANERJEE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai, Dated 31/07/2025
*SC SrPs
*SC SrPs
*SC SrPs
*SC SrPs
I.T.A. No. 3597/Mum/2025
आदेश की ितिलिप अेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. थ / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु! / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयु! ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /DR,ITAT, Mumbai, 6. गाड% फाई/ Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER