KANCHENJUNGA DISTILLERIES & LIQUORS,SOUTH SIKKIM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 3(2), , GANGTOK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 930/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 August 2025AY 2021-2022Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the belated filing of Form 10CCB before the order under Section 143(1) is a curable procedural defect and constitutes sufficient compliance, thus entitling the assessee to the deduction. It relied on Supreme Court and Kolkata High Court precedents, directing the AO to allow the claim.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 2,07,41,111/- under Section 80IE, but the Form 10CCB report was filed after the due date, though prior to the processing of the return under Section 143(1). The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction, a decision upheld by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether belated filing of Form 10CCB, when filed before the order under Section 143(1), disentitles the assessee from claiming deduction under Chapter VI-A of the Income-tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80IE,Section 143(1),Section 80IB,Section 80IA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AR
For Respondent: Shri Somnath Das Biswas, DR
Hearing: 08.07.2025Pronounced: 26.08.2025

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the CIT (A) Addl/JCIT(A), Delhi(hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 12.03.2025 for the AY 2021-22.

2.

The issue raised in ground number 1 is against the confirmation of disallowance of Rs. 2,07,41,111/- claimed as deduction under section 80 IE of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), which was made by the Learned AO on the ground that report in form No. 10CCB was filed belatedly after due date.

4.

In the appellate proceedings, the appellate authority dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee has not filed the Form No. 10 CCB within the due date and therefore, disallowance made by the AO is in accordance with the provision of Section 143(1) of the Act.

5.

after hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the return of income was filed within the due date, however the Form 10 CCB was filed after the due date, but before the date of passing the order under Section 143(1) of the Act.The AO CPC disallowed the claim on the ground that since the Form No. 10 CCB was filed after the due date, therefore, assessee was not entitled to deduction under Chapter VIA of the Act, which was confirmed by Learned CIT (A). In our opinion, the act of AO (CPC) is not correct as the filing of Form 10 CCB is a procedural requirement and cannot disentitle the assessee from its claim under Chapter VIA. Nonetheless, the assessee filed the Form 10 CCB online before the

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 26.08.2025.

More judgments on Section 80IE

All 99 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80IE →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →