Technical defects can not be ignored in this new era of e-filing – ITAT

Technical defects can not be ignored in era of e-filing, AO was directed to consider revised Audit Report in Form 10CCB 

In a recent judgment, ITAT Guwahati has held that technical defects can not be ignore in this new era of e-filing, Assessing Officer was directed to consider revised Audit Report in Form 10CCB in support of deduction u/s 80-IE

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 4176 (2024) (07) ITAT

In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC affirming the action of CPC in not allowing deduction under section 80IE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

Section 80IE contains special provision for certain undertakings in North-Eastern States. The section provides for deduction of hundred per cent of the profits and gains derived from eligible business for ten consecutive assessment years.

The assessee furnished its return of income before the extended due date and claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. But the same was denied on account of some inadvertent clerical mistake in the audit report in form 10CCB where in the column of the amount available as deduction u/s 80IE was to be mentioned, the auditor mistakenly written only ‘section 80’.

On appeal, even CIT(A) had treated it as clerical mistake but had referred to the guidance note issued by the Income Tax Department through which the auditors are required to comply with the reporting requirement of the Central Govt. In the absence of corrected audited report, the CIT(A) did not grant any relief to the assessee.

The Tribunal observed that the assessee had been claiming deduction u/s. 80IC/80IE of the Act consistently for past several year and the deduction u/s 80IC/80IE had been allowed by the Income Tax Department.

It was also noted that the Form 10CCB had been uploaded on the portal and all the other items mentioned in the said form issued under signature of the auditor had not been disputed except for the amount appearing in the column no. 13 which was total amount of deduction u/s. 80IC/80IE of the Act.

The Tribunal also noted that the auditor, instead of mentioning the amount of deduction mistakenly wrote only the word ‘sec. 80’.  It had been claimed by the assessee that the auditor tried to upload the correct report on the portal but was not successful.

The Tribunal opined that one can not ignore the technical defects in this new era of e-filing. Further, the facts and circumstances of the case showed (i) deduction being allowed in the preceding years, (ii) clerical mistake in the audit report furnished in support of the claim of deduction, (iii) there being no mechanism to e-file the revised report after a certain time limit and (iv) no opportunity was granted by the CPC to the assessee before making the alleged disallowance, we are inclined to restore the issue to the file of the AO.

The Tribunal directed the assessee to furnish the revised audit report along with a certificate of auditor mentioning about the clerical mistake made in the original Form 10CCB and the same being corrected in the revised Form 10CCB.

Further, it was directed that the AO after affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee, on considering the revised audit report and if the same is found to be correct then decide in accordance with law and allow deduction u/s. 80IE of the Act, if the assessee is otherwise found to be eligible in the light of the corrected audit report in Form 10CCB. 

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

• For registration u/s 12AA if CIT satisfaction limited to objects or also to activities? SLP admitted
• Over 30 approvals u/s 153D within minutes amounted to total non-application of mind
• When disallowance is made u/s 37(1) section 69C is not applicable – ITAT
• ITAT refuses to accept cash book as source of deposit as assessee was not subject to audit
• Mere preparation of income tax notice and send to dispatch not effective issuance