M/S. RAJ CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PVT. LTD., (SUCCESSOR COMPANY OF M/S. HEADMAN MERCANTILE PVT. LTD.,),KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(1),, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 257/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 June 2026AY 2020-20215 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, following the jurisdictional High Court's decision, restored the issue to the Assessing Officer. The AO is directed to consider the Form 10IC and adjudicate the benefit of Section 115BAA or MAT credit.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed the benefit of Section 115BAA but did not file Form 10IC along with its return. A rectification application with the form was rejected. The assessee sought the benefit of the lower tax rate and MAT credit.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for the concessional tax rate under Section 115BAA despite not filing Form 10IC with the return, and whether MAT credit is admissible.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115BAA,Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH,

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN

Hearing: 25/06/2026Pronounced: 25/06/2026

आदेश/O R D E R Per George Mathan, JM: These are two appeals filed by the assessees against the separate orders of the ADDL/JCIT(A)-3, CHENNAI [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.NFAC/2019-20/10431222 dated 26.11.2025 and in appeal no.NFAC/2019-20/10431049 dated 17.12.2025 for the assessment year 202021 respectively. Since issues are involved in both the appeals are identical, therefore, these have been heard together and are being disposed of by the common order.

ITA 256&257/Kol/2026 2. Shri Miraj D Shah, AR represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Mrinmay Basak, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

3.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee is private company. For the impugned assessment year, the assessee has filed its return of income claiming the benefit of 115BAA. However, the assessee had not filed the Form 10IC along with return. It was the submission that consequently, the intimation came to be issued denying the assessee at lower rate of tax under the provisions of section 115BAA. It was the submission that when denying the assessee the benefit of lower rate of tax u/s115BAA, the CPC also failed to give MAT credit to the assessee. It was the submission that the assessee has filed a rectification application u/s 154 along with requisite Form 10IC. It was the submission that the same has also been rejected. It was the submission that under similar circumstances, the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Fastner Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. in ITAT/267/2024 order dated 10.01.2025 has upheld the directions of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal restoring the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer to consider the Form 10IC filed. It was prayed that in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs.

ITA 256&257/Kol/2026 Fastner Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. referred to supra, the assessee may be granted the benefit of lower rate of tax.

4.

In reply, the ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the CPC and ld. CIT(A).

5.

I have heard the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts in the present case clearly shows that from page 4 onwards, the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Fastner Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. referred to supra held as follows:

“Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that the assessee has filed the return of income for the assessment year 2020-21 on or before the due dates specified under Section 139(1) of the Act. Equally, it is not in dispute that the assessee company has opted for taxation under Section 115BAA of the Act. This option was available to the assessee by opting the option given in filing status in Part A- GE of the form by return of income in ITR6. This conduct of the assessee will undoubtedly go to show that the assessee intended to opt to pay tax under the simplified tax regime as also accepted in the Circular issued by the Central Board. Furthermore, during the relevant period there was Covid pandemic which also led to certain other difficulties for the assessee to upload the form along with the return within the extended time thereof. That apart, the assessee has specifically stated that they had certain difficulties in uploading the form in the Income tax portal. One more aspect which the assessee pointed out is that in case of a HUF opting under the new taxation scheme under Section 115BAC, the portal requires management number of 10IE while filing the income tax return as this being a mandatory column and the assessee continue process of filing ITR without filling the same and if there was non-compliance in filing Form 10IE, the assessee would be aware of that and will submit the same but such facilities is not provided when returns are filed by companies. The peculiar facts and circumstances would show that the error was an inadvertent procedural error and the conduct of the assessee will clearly show that they had opted for taxation under Section 115BAA of the Act. Thus, taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case on hand, which we consider to be very peculiar, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Tribunal.

ITA 256&257/Kol/2026 Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of and the matter stands restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer to permit the assessee to file the report in Form 10IC and the Assessing Officer shall consider as to what relief the assessee would be entitled to subject to the conditions that the assessee fulfils all other requisite conditions as per law.” 5.1 A perusal of the directions issued by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court clearly shows that Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court has upheld the directions of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal directing the Assessing Officer to take into consideration the Form 10IC filed along with 154 application. This being so, respectfully following the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Fastner Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. referred to supra, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to adjudicate the issue of lower rate of tax u/s 115BAA of the Act. Alternatively, the assessee should be given the benefit of MAT credit.

6.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25/06/2026.

Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER Kolkata, Dated: 25/06/2026 RS 4

ITA 256&257/Kol/2026

आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. संबंधित आयकर आयुक्त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. ववभागीय प्रतततनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,/ DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.

BY ORDER,

Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Kolkata

More judgments on Section 115BAA

All 225 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115BAA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →