BSC CANDC JOINT VENTURE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/40/2026HC DelhiDLHC01109132202522 January 2026Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court advised the appellant to approach the CBDT under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act for relaxation of the rules to allow the claim. The Court did not make any observations on the appellant's entitlement.

What were the facts?

The appellant inadvertently failed to claim a deduction under Section 80-IA(4) in its original return. The deduction was subsequently claimed before the CIT(A), and the appellant's eligibility for the deduction is not disputed.

What were the issues?

Whether the appellant can claim a deduction that was not claimed in the original return, and if so, through which authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80-IA(4),Section 119

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~69 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 40/2026

BSC CANDC JOINT VENTURE

.....Appellant Through: Mr. Rohit Jain, Mr. Deepesh Jain & Mr. Ram Krishna Rao, Advs.

versus

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .....Respondent Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC with Mr. V.K. Saksena, JSC & Ms. Hemlata Rawat, JSC.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

O R D E R %

22.01.2026 1. The Court was not prima-facie inclined to entertain the matter, however after arguing for some time and consulting, Mr. Rohit Jain, learned counsel for the appellant stands advised to apply under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1961”) before the CBDT to seek relaxation. 2. The facts as pleaded in the case are that due to inadvertence, the appellant did not claim deduction under Section 80-IA(4) of the Act of 1961, while filing the original return. The same was however claimed before the Commissioner Income Tax appeal during appellate proceedings. 3. Learned counsel submitted that so far as the appellant’s entitlement for claiming exemption and its eligibility is concerned, the same is not in dispute, which is evident from the facts that in subsequent years the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2026 at 12:45:36

appellant has got the the benefit of deduction under Section from 80-IA(4). 4. Without recording any finding, the appellant is permitted to apply before the CBDT, for the desired relief along with a certified copy of the order instant within a period of two months from today. 5. In case any such application/request is filed, the CBDT shall consider the same in accordance with law. 6. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. 7. Needless to observe that we have not made any observation about the entitlement of the appellant or otherwise in relation to its entitlement of exemption.

DINESH MEHTA, J.

VINOD KUMAR, J. JANUARY 22, 2026/sr

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2026 at 12:45:36

More judgments on Section 80-IA(4)

All 86 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80-IA(4) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →