NIRMAN HOMES,PUNE vs. DDIT, CPC, BENGALURU
Facts
The assessee, a partnership firm, claimed a deduction of Rs.53,54,700/- under section 80IB of the Income Tax Act for AY 2022-23. The CPC disallowed this deduction during processing under section 143(1) because Form 10CCB was not furnished within the prescribed time limit. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CBDT had already condoned the delay in filing Form 10CCB under section 119(2)(b) of the IT Act. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, directing the AO to verify the claims made in Form 10CCB after providing due opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the deduction claimed under section 80IB of the IT Act can be disallowed if Form 10CCB is filed belatedly, despite the CBDT subsequently condoning the delay.
Sections Cited
80IB, 143(1), 119(2)(b), 234A, 234B, 234C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2092/PUN/2024 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Nirman Homes, Vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru. 205, Citi Center, Karve Road, Avurved Rasshala, Pune- 411004. PAN : AAAAN5785E Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Suhas Bora Shri Sampada Ingale Revenue by : Smt. Neha Thakur (Virtual) Date of hearing : 21.01.2026 Date of pronouncement : 30.01.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.09.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A), Pune-11 [‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the assessment year 2022-23. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a partnership firm and has furnished its return of income declaring an income of Rs.1,61,25,210/- after claiming deduction of Rs.53,54,700/- u/s 80IB of the IT Act. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the IT Act and deduction u/s 80IB of the IT Act was disallowed since
2 ITA No.2092/PUN/2024 Form 10CCB report was not furnished within the prescribed time limit. 3. Being aggrieved with the above intimation, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). After considering the submissions of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee and confirmed the disallowance made by CPC. 4. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. We have heard Ld. counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the paper book and copy of case laws furnished by the assessee. Copy of order dated 07.01.2026 passed u/s 119(2)(b) of the IT Act wherein delay in furnishing Form 10CCB of the IT Act was condoned by CBDT was also filed by the Counsel of the assessee before the bench. 6. In this regard, we find that the only grievance of the assessee was with respect to disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80IB of the IT Act since Form 10CCB report could not be filed within the prescribed time limit and was filed belatedly due to which above claim u/s 80IB was disallowed by CPC. We further find that the assessee has moved an application before CBDT praying for condonation of delay in filing Form 10CCB. The above application filed by the assessee was accepted by CBDT and vide order dated
3 ITA No.2092/PUN/2024 07.01.2026 the delay in filing Form 10CCB has already been condoned by CBDT. From the perusal of CBDT order dated 07.01.2026 passed u/s 119(2)(b) of the IT Act it is apparent that the CBDT has condoned the delay in filing of Form 10CCB of the IT Act subject to verification of claims made by the assessee in Form 10CCB by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The order passed by CBDT in this regard is produced as under :-
Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the light of above delay condonation order dated 07.01.2026 passed by
4 ITA No.2092/PUN/2024 CBDT in the case of the assessee, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to pass appropriate order as per fact and law after verifying the claim made by the assessee in Form 10CCB with regard to section 80IB of the IT Act. Needless to say that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer in this regard and to produce relevant documents/submissions/evidences, if any, in support of claim made in Form 10CCB without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 30th day of January, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 30th January, 2026. Sujeet
5 ITA No.2092/PUN/2024 आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT(A), Pune-11. 4. The Pr. CIT/CIT concerned. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब�च, 5. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 6. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
