Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return claiming deduction under Section 80P(2)(d). The return was processed under Section 143(1), and the deduction was denied. The CIT(A) upheld this denial, stating the assessee had opted for the new tax regime under Section 115BAD.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee had not opted for the new tax regime for the relevant assessment year. Therefore, the denial of deduction under Section 80P(2)(d) was incorrect.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee had opted for the new tax regime under Section 115BAD, thereby disallowing the deduction under Section 80P(2)(d).
Sections Cited
250, 143(1), 139(1), 80P(2)(d), 115BAD, 115BAD(1), 115BAD(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE
Before: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal(NFAC) passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y.2024-25 dated 09.05.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee are as under :
[A] “1. The learned CIT erred on facts and in law in denying the deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act amounting to Rs.80,721 eligible under the normal provisions of the Act, without appreciating the facts as well as the law involved in its proper perspective. He failed to appreciate that, the assessee society has failed to comply with the conditions provided u/s 115BAD(2) of the Act and therefore, the proviso to section 115BAD(1) becomes effective under which the option opted by the assessee u/s 115BAD(1) becomes invalid and its income has to be computed as per the normal provisions of the Act as if the option u/s 115BAD has not been opted by the assessee. He also failed in rejecting the appeal on wrong presumptions and wrong interpretation of law.
The appellant craves leave to add, alter, DLEETE OR substitute all OR any of the above grounds of appeal.”
Findings and Analysis : 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records.
2.1 In this case the Assessee had filed return of Income on 30/10/2024 for AY 2024-25 and the due date for filling Return u/s.139(1) was 31/10/2024. Thus the Return of Income was filed u/s.139(1) of the Income Tax Act. The Assessee claimed deduction u/s.80P(d) of the Act.
The Return was processed u/s.143(1) on 28/02/2025. The Centralized Processing centre u/s.143(1) of the Act denied the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s.80P of the Act. Aggrieved by the 2 [A] Order u/s.143(1) of the Act, the Assessee filed Appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (appeal) . The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (appeal) upheld the denial of deduction u/s.80P of the Act. The Relevant paragraph 6.3, 6.4 and 7 of the Order of the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[ld.CIT(A)] are reproduced here as under : “6.3 The proviso to sub-section (5) makes it clear that once the appellant has opted for taxation u/s 115BAD, the same cannot be withdrawn in subsequent years. Further, sub-section (2) makes it clear that deduction u/s 80P cannot be claimed if opting for section 115BAD. As per records, the appellant had filed Form 10-IF for the AY 2023-24 (Previous Year 2022-23).
6.4 Hence, the tax computed by the AO/CPC is found to be correct and the grounds of appeal are hereby dismissed.
Conclusion: In the result, the instant appeal is dismissed.” 3.1 Thus, the Commissioner of Income Tax (appeal) has upheld the Order u/s 143(1) stating that the Assessee had opted for New Tax Regime u/s 115BAD of the Income Tax Act.
We have perused the paper book filed by the Assessee. It is noted that Assessee had “not opted” for New Tax Regime u/s.115BAD of the Act for A.Y.2023-24. The relevant part of the 3 [A] Return of Income for A.Y.2023-24 is scanned and reproduced here under :
The Assessee had not opted for New Tax Regime for A.Y.2024-25 as is evident from the Return of Income. The relevant part of the Return is scanned and reproduced here under :
The Assessee had claimed deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act of Rs.80,724/- in the Return of Income. 4 [A] 6.1 Thus, when assessee has not opted for 115BAD, the Ld.CIT(A) has earned in upholding the order u/s.143(1) on the basis of the incorrect fact.
7. Ld.AR has relied on the decision of ITAT Pune Bench in the case of Akshay Nitin Malu Vs. ITO in for A.Y.2022-23 wherein, ITAT in Para 9 held as under : “9. We find some force in the above arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. It is an admitted fact that although the assessee had originally exercised the option for taxation u/s 115BAC by filing the Form No. 10-1E on 18.07.2022. however, the assessee has filed the return of income on 20.07.2022 declaring total income at Rs.24,01,740/- under the old regime of taxation. It is also an admitted fact that the return was processed on 07.08.2023 which is much after the date of filing of the return. It is not a case that the assessee has filed Form 10-IE and also filed the return under the new tax regime and thereafter filed a revised return withdrawing the option which according to us is not permissible in the said previous year and the assessee can change the option only in the next year However, in the instant case, the assessee after filing the Form 10-IE has opted for the old regime of taxation in the return filed. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the assessee cannot be forced to adopt for the new regime. We, therefore, find merit in the arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) was not justified in upholding the action of the CPC in processing the return of income determining the total income at Rs.64,41,940/- under the new regime of taxation. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) is set aside and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 5
ITA No.1831/PUN/2025 [A]
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.”
Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case we direct the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of the Assessee for deduction u/s.80P(2)(d) of the Act. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed.
In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25 September, 2025.