INTELLOSOL SOFTWARES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 10(1), DELHI

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, िद�ी पीठ�, नई िद�ी INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCHES, ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.9016/DEL/2025 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2020-21) DCIT, CIRCLE- 10(1), 3rd INTELLOSOL SOFTWARES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Floor, Room No.389A, C.R. Building, IP Estate, NO. 42E, FIRST FLOOR, HOUSE NO. 13/5, SEWAK PARK, NEAR Vs. NEW DELHI-110001, MASJID UTTAM NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110050 अपीलाथ� Appellant ��थ� Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AADCI9829H

अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant represented by: Shri Nikhil KP, CA & Shri Dev Chawal, CA ��थ� �ारा/Respondent represented by: Shri Balkrishan Gopal, SR DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 29.06.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 17.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER AMITABH SHUKLA, AM This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Addl/JCIT(Appeals)-3, Bengaluru, dated 28.12.2023 arising out of intimation order 24.12.2021 passed under section u/s 143(1) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2020-21. The word ‘Act’ herein this order would mean Income Tax Act, 1961.

ITA 9016/DEL/2025 INTELLOSOL SOFTWARES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED 2. At the outset, we have noted that the Registry has identified the delay of 669 days in this case for filing of appeals. Justifying the delay, the appellant had submitted that due to bona fide and unavoidable reasons the appeal could not file in time. It was submitted that as advised by earlier tax consultant/Chartered Accountant, who had advised that appeal before the ITAT need not be filled till disposal of the rectification application field u/s 154 of the Act. The ld Counsel further submitted that due to change in the management of the Company, and the tax matters were not property transitioned to the new management. The registered e-mail IDs on the Income Tax Portal were also not accessible to the present personal. All these factors contributed to the above-mentioned delays. Thus, it was argued that the delay is not intentional. We are conscious that no litigant gains by delay its matter. The Ld. DR did not seriously object to the condonation of delay. Delay of 669 days in filing of these assessee’s appeal are condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Hon’ble Apex court decision in the case of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 3. The only issue arising in the present appeal is regarding the action of the Revenue in applying tax rate of 30% + surcharge as against tax rate of 25%. The ld. Counsel narrated brief facts of the case that order u/s 143(1) was passed by CPC, Bangalore on 24.12.2021. CPC through the impugned rate computed the tax liability of the appellant applying tax rate of 30%. It is the case of the assessee that it is exigible to tax rate of 25%

Page 2 of 4

ITA 9016/DEL/2025 INTELLOSOL SOFTWARES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED 4. Heard rival parties and perused the material available on record. It is the case of the appellant that during the year under consideration, its turnover did not exceed to Rs.400 Crores and hence it’s tax liability under the normal provisions of the Act should be calculated at the rate of 25% plus applicable surcharges and education cess. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that its petition u/s 154 was erroneously rejected by the revenue authorities. It was argued that the appellant has not opted for the concessional tax regime under the provision of section 115BAA of the Act. 5. We have noted that only issue is raised as to whether the turnover of the appellant for the year under consideration was below Rs.400 Crores or not. In the interest of justice, we remit the issue to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer for limited verification of the actual turnover of the appellant. In case, the same is below Rs.400 Crores, the tax rate of 25%+applicable charge and education cess would be liable to be imposed. Grounds of appeal raised by the appellant 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 17th July, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [ANUBHAV SHARMA] [AMITABH SHUKLA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 17.07.2026 Shekhar Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. PCIT Page 3 of 4

ITA 9016/DEL/2025 INTELLOSOL SOFTWARES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Page 4 of 4