SRI. KRISHNA SPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against CIT(A)’s order vide DIN & Order No: ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1073444239(1) dated 19.02.2025. 2. The assessee filed return of income on 09.10.2023 declaring income of Rs.2,94,32,200/- under the old regime and not opted the option under section 115BA / 115BAA/115BAB of the Act in the specified column it was mentioned ‘No’. While processing the return under section 143(1) of the Act, it was mentioned as ‘Yes’ and no deduction/benefits under old tax regime was allowed to the assessee as claimed in the ITR. In the case of the assessee for Assessment Years 2021-22 and 2022-23 while filing the return assessee had mentioned as ‘No’ i.e., not opting new regime and it was accepted by the Page 2 of 2 CPC and processed as per the old regime. However, this year in spite of opting old regime, the CPC has considered the return of the assessee under the new regime and raised demand of Rs.9,82,480/-. Assessee has not filed Form 10IC i.e., opting for the scheme under section 115BAA of the Act. Therefore, considering the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and grounds of appeal taken by the assessee, we are remitting this issue back to the JAO for consideration and give benefit under old tax regime as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act after examination/verification of the claims made by the assessee after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and assessee is directed to substantiate its claim with cogent documents. 3. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page. (KESHAV DUBEY) Accountant Member- Bangalore. Dated: 22.08.2025. /NS/* Copy to: 1. Appellants 2. Respondent 3. DRP 4. CIT 5. CIT(A) 6. DR,ITAT, Bangalore. 7. Guard file By order