T vs. SRICHAKRA LIMITED,MADURAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, considering the assessee's bona fide belief and the ongoing writ proceedings. The issue of deduction under Section 35(2AB) was remitted to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeals for AY 2012-13 and 2013-14 were filed with a significant delay. The deduction under Section 35(2AB) was denied by the lower authorities for want of Form No. 3CM.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned and if the deduction under Section 35(2AB) can be allowed despite the absence of Form No. 3CM before the lower authorities.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos. 3088 & 3089/Chny/2019 (िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) M/s. TVS Srichakra Limited DCIT बनाम/ 7-b, TVS Building West Veli Street, Corporate Circle 2, Vs. Madurai 625 001. Madurai. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAACT-5557-G (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Ms. N.V. Lakshmi (Advocate) – Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Mr. ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 04-04-2022 Date of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 04-04-2022 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aforesaid appeals by assessee for Assessment Years (AY) 2012- 13 & 2013-14 arises out of the separate orders passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Madurai [CIT(A)] dated 28- 03-2018. However, the facts as well as the issues in both the appeals are same i.e., denial of deduction u/s 35(2AB) for want of Form No.3CM. & 3089/Chny/2019 - 2 - 2. The Registry has noted a delay 506 days in the appeals, the condonation of which has been sought by the assessee on the strength of condonation petition which is accompanied by affidavit of the Managing Director of the assessee company. The Ld. AR submitted that the deduction u/s 35(2AB) was disallowed for want of Form No.3CM though the assessee had already filed application in Form No.3CK. The assessee preferred further appeal against the assessment order wherein the stand of Ld. AO was confirmed. Upon advice, the assessee filed Writ of Mandamus before Hon’ble High Court for obtaining the approval of DSIR. The assessee did not prefer further appeal against first appellate order under the impression that the assessee would get relief once the Writ is disposed-off. However, based on professional advice, the assessee has filed appeal before Tribunal with a delay of 506 days. The Ld. AR submitted that delay was neither willful nor wanton and it was under bona-fide belief as aforesaid. Though Ld. Sr. DR opposed condonation of delay, however, going by the pleadings of Ld. AR, we form an opinion that the assessee has reasonable cause for late filing of the appeals. Otherwise also, the non-condonation of delay would frustrate the outcome of Writ Proceedings as allowed by Hon’ble High Court. Therefore, we condone the delay and proceed for adjudication of the same on merits. 3. The Ld. AR placed on record copy of Form No.3CM which is dated 14.09.2021. The Ld. AR submitted that the deduction u/s 35(2AB) was denied since this form could not be produced by the assessee before lower authorities. The Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the same may be sent to Ld. AO for verification etc. & 3089/Chny/2019 - 3 - 4. Concurring with the submissions made before us, we remit the issue of deduction u/s 35(2AB), for both the years, for quantification and re-adjudication by Ld. AO. The assessee is directed to file requisite detils / information. 5. The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes.
More judgments on Section 35(2AB)
- Aeon Formulations Private Limited, Chennai vs Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward 2(1)…ITA 2481/CHNY/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Devarsons Industries Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The D.C.I.T. Circle-1(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 2327/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Ceat Limited, Mumbai vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 8146/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Forbes Marshall Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs Income Tax Officer Circle 8, PuneITA 3206/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Pochjraja Industries Ltd., Hosur vs ACIT, Circle-1, HosurITA 1072/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026