COSMOS ENGITECH PRIVATE LIMITED,ATLADRA vs. DCIT, VADODARA

The above appeal has been filed by the assessee against order passed by the Ld.Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “ld.CIT(A)] dated 30.8.2024 under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) arising out of the order of passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2023-24.

The sole issue involved in this appeal is regarding the denial of claim of deduction under section 80JJAA of the Act on account of 2 delay in filing of Form No.10DA, which is relating to number of employees employed by the assessee-company.

The ld.counsel for the assessee has submitted that both the lower authorities have rejected the claim of the assessee under section 80JJAA of the Act holding that report in Form no.10DA was not filed on or before the due date prescribed under section 44AB of the Act, which was 30.9.2023. The ld.counsel for the assessee has brought our attention to the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) to submit that it was duly submitted before the ld.CIT(A) that the deduction claimed u/s 80JJAA was based on the report of Chartered Accountant received on 22/09/2023, and even UDIN -Unique Document Identification Number was also generated on the 22/09/2023 by the company’s Chartered Accountant, but due to some issues, such report could not be uploaded online. However, the same was uploaded/filed even before the application of mind by the concerned Assessing Officer (in short “AO”), and before the communication of intimation by the CPC under section 143(1) of the Act.

We note that the said audit report in form no.10DA was filed to the concerned AO before processing of the return. The section 80JJA is the deduction provision and not the exemption of provision. The ld.AO was supposed to consider the said report at the time of processing of the return of income. The law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd. [2016] 71 taxmann.com 35 is squarely applicable to the case on hand.