SUBHASH CHANDER BAHL,NOIDA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 5(2)(1), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3417/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 August 2025AY 2023-24Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)1 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 held that the filing of Form 10IE is a directory provision and failure to file it along with the return should not deny the assessee the benefit of the new tax regime. The assessee's grievance was accepted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2023-24 arises against an order related to proceedings under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act. The core issue is the denial of the assessee's claim to be assessed under the new tax regime (Section 115BAC).

What were the issues?

Whether the failure to file Form 10IE along with the return can deny the assessee the benefit of assessment under the new tax regime under Section 115BAC of the Income-tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 115BAC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 21.08.2025Pronounced: 21.08.2025

Date of hearing 21.08.2025 Date of pronouncement 21.08.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2023-24, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)- 2, Visakhapatnam’s order dated 23.01.2025 having DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1072468551(1), involving proceedings under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Delay of 54 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in the larger interest of justice and in light of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

3.

It emerges at the outset that the sole substantive issue herein between both the parties is that of correctness of the learned lower authorities’ action denying the assessee’s claim to be assessed under the new tax regime under section 115BAC of the Act for the precise reason that he had failed to file the prescribed Form 10IE along with the return. Learned counsel has quoted the tribunal’s order in Pran Panda Vs. ITO, & 1510/Kol/2024, dated 04.11.2024 that the filing of Form 10IE is a directory provision which could not deny the assessee’s benefit of being assessed under the new tax regime. That being the case, I hereby accept the assessee’s instant sole substantive grievance and direct the learned assessing authority to assess him under the new regime as per law in very terms.

More judgments on Section 115BAC

All 144 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115BAC →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →