SEARCE LOGISTICS ANALTICS LLP,PUNE vs. DCIT, CIR-2, PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1468/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 September 2025AY 2018-19Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the delay in filing Form 56F was a procedural default and not fatal to the substantive claim for deduction under Section 10AA, especially since the assessee had fulfilled other conditions and the delay was condoned. The decision relied on High Court and ITAT precedents.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a return of income for AY 2018-19 claiming a deduction under section 10AA. The assessee had filed Form 56F after the due date but before the completion of assessment. The AO disallowed the deduction for non-compliance with the filing due date.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing Form 56F beyond the prescribed due date, but before assessment completion, bars the assessee from claiming deduction under Section 10AA.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10AA,Section 10A(5),Section 143(3),Section 143(3A),Section 143(3B),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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, PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE

Before: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B Phadke – AR
For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde –CIT(DR)
Hearing: 02/09/2025Pronounced: 25/09/2025

Assessment Year: 2018-19 Searce Logistics Analytics V The DCIT, LLP, s Circle-2, Pune. It 6 Blue Ridge, Rajiv Gandhi IT Park Phase-1, Hinjewadi, Pune – 411027. PAN: ABWFS3166N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Kishor B Phadke – AR Revenue by Shri Amit Bobde –CIT(DR) Date of hearing 02/09/2025 Date of pronouncement 25/09/2025 आदेश/ ORDER

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:

1.

This appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2018-19 dated 01.05.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed under section 143(3) read with sections 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 25.03.2021. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :

1. The learned CIT(A)-NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming the order of learned AO, assessing total income of appellant at Rs. 13,25,78,606/ instead of returned income of Rs. 6,66,73,560/-; by making disallowance of deduction u/s 10AA Rs. 6,59,05,046/-

2.

The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in upholding the disallowance of exemption u/s 10AA of the ITA, 1961 amounting to Rs. 6,59,05,046/-, despite the appellant having duly filed Form 56F manually on 08/10/2019 i.e. before completion of assessment and complied with all conditions for claiming the exemption.

3.

The appellant submits that the delay in filing Form No. 56F constitutes a mere procedural or technical default, which is curable in nature, as consistently upheld by various judicial pronouncements.

4. Appellant craves leave to add / amend /modify/delete all / any of the grounds of appeal.”

Findings & Analysis : 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, Assessee filed Return of Income for A.Y.2018-19 on 30.11.2018 claiming deduction u/s.10AA of Rs.6,59,05,043/-. The Assessing Officer during the scrutiny proceedings noted that Assessee has not filed Form No.56F along with the Return of Income. During the scrutiny proceedings, Assessee uploaded Form 2 No.56 on 09.10.2019. The Assessing Officer disallowed the Assessee’s claim for exemption u/s.10AA of the Act, as Assessee has not filed Form No.56F within the due date. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order, Assessee filed appeal before the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[ld.CIT(A)].

3. The ld.CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance made by the AO.

4.

Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), Assessee has filed appeal before this Tribunal.

4.1 Thus, the only issue before us is whether the Assessee is eligible for exemption u/s.10AA of the Act, even though admittedly Form No.56F was filed on 09.10.2019 during assessment proceedings. As per Section 10AA r.w.s 10A(5) deduction under section 10AA shall not be allowed, unless the Assessee furnishes Report of an Accountant in Form Number 56F as per Rule 16D of the Income Tax Rules, along with the Return of Income.

4.2 The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Astrotech Steels P. Ltd. [2025] 175 taxmann.com 285 (Madras) vide order dated 03.06.2025 has held as under :

Quote “5. The prescribed date for filing Form 56F was 31.10.2018 and, admittedly, assessee had filed it on 20.12.2018. Counsel was unable to show any provision which provides that after the due date an assessee is barred from filing Form 56F. Admittedly, Form 56F was filed and, in effect, the delay in filing has been condoned.

6.

We agree with the ITAT that the facts in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Wipro Ltd. [2022] 140 taxmann.com 223/288 Taxman 491/446 ITR 1 (SC) were different. In that case, assessee initially made the claim and did not seek to carry forward losses, but during the assessment proceedings, the assessee had taken an altogether different stand and sought withdrawal of the initial deduction claimed in the return of income and sought to carry forward losses. In the case at hand, the deduction under Section 10AA of the Act has been claimed in the original return of income which was filed within the prescribed time, but Form 56F was filed about 50 days later.

7. Assessee having duly fulfilled the substantial requirement as well as the procedural requirement, though there is a minor technical breach in fulfillment of the procedural requirement, the CIT(A) as well as the ITAT have opined that the delay in filing Form 56F would not be fatal to the substantive claim of the assessee. In fact, what has also weighed in the mind of the ITAT is that the same claim had been allowed to assessee and this was the sixth assessment year of claiming the amount of deduction.” Unquote 4.3 Similarly, ITAT Mumbai in the case of Fortrea Scientific Private Limited Vs ACIT in for A.Y.2016-17 vide order dated 18.12.2024 held that once form

5.

No contrary decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court has been brought to our notice. Ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Wipro Limited 446 ITR 1, however, Hon’ble Madras High Court has distinguished the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court.

6. Respectfully following the Hon’ble Madras High Court and ITAT Mumbai(supra), we hold that since assessee had filed Form No.56F during the assessment proceedings, Assessee is eligible for exemption u/s.10AA of the Act. Accordingly, ground of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed.

7.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 25 September, 2025.

More judgments on Section 10AA

All 857 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →