PP AUTO INNOVATORS,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-36(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2425/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 October 2024AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)3 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 found that NFAC's assertion of non-submission of details was factually incorrect, as the assessee had furnished them. Consequently, the appeals were restored to the NFAC for *de novo* adjudication, with directions to provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard and to allow the submission of fresh evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals for AY 2017-18 and 2018-19 against orders by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which had dismissed the appeals citing non-submission of details for deduction u/s 80IC and Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) credit. The assessee contended that all necessary details were duly submitted to both the AO and NFAC, but were overlooked by NFAC. The appeals were also delayed by 19 days, for which condonation was sought and granted.

What were the issues?

Disallowance of deduction under section 80IC and non-allowance of Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) credit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 80IC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. Anu Krishna Agarwal, CIT DR
Hearing: 10/10/2024Pronounced: 10/10/2024

O R D E R PER BENCH: The appeals in and 2425/Del/2024 for AY 2017-18 1. and 2018-19, arise out of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC’, in short] dated 26.02.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 29.12.2019 by the Assessing Officer, ACIT, Circle-36(1), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).

2.

At the outset, we find that both the appeals are delayed by 19 days. The assessee has filed a delay condonation petition together with an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay. On going through the same, we are inclined to condone the delay in filing appeal and admit both the appeals for adjudication.

& 2425/Del/2024 PP Auto Innovators 3. Identical issues are involved in both the appeals, hence, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.

4.

Though, the assessee has raised several grounds, the only effective issue to be decided is with regard to disallowance of deduction u/s 80IC of the Act in addition to not allowing Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) credit to the assessee.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. On going through the order the ld NFAC, Delhi we find that the appeals of the assessee were dismissed on the ground that no details were filed by the assessee in support of the claim of deduction u/s 80IC of the Act and the aspect of AMT credit. This is factually incorrect as assessee had duly furnished the entire details before the ld AO as well as before ld NFAC, which was ignored by the ld NFAC. Hence, we deem it fit and appropriate to restore these appeals to the file of the ld NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also at liberty to furnish fresh evidences, if any, in support of its contentions. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 10/10/2024.

More judgments on Section 80IC

All 1,180 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80IC →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →