Loading judgment…

BADA SAAB PROPERTIES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4(1)(1), MUMBAI | BharatTax

BADA SAAB PROPERTIES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4449/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 February 2026AY 2024-25Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)1 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The assessee, a domestic company, opted for a concessional tax rate under Section 115BAA. It inadvertently uploaded Form 10-IB instead of Form 10-IC. After receiving an intimation under Section 143(1), the assessee uploaded Form 10-IC belatedly.

Held

The Tribunal observed that the error was clerical and technical, not a failure to comply with the substance of the law. Citing various judicial precedents, it was held that condoning the delay in filing Form 10-IC is appropriate to provide justice and avoid rejection on technicalities.

Key Issues

Whether the assessee can be denied the benefit of concessional tax rate under Section 115BAA due to the inadvertent belated filing of Form 10-IC?

Sections Cited

115BAA, 143(1), 115JB, 119(2)(b), 139(1), 154, 10(B)(8), 10(B)(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. AR

For Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. AR

Hearing: 24.12.2025Pronounced: 23.02.2026

The Ld. AO passed the rectification order u/s 154 of the Act dated 04.02.2025. In appeal filed before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee’s contention for belated filing of Form 10-IC was rejected stating that it was beyond the power of the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay in filing Form 10-IC. It is observed that as per the Taxation Law (Amendment Act, 2019) w.e.f. 01.04.2020 u/s 115BAA of the Act which was then inserted, the assessee being a domestic company for any previous year relevant to the assessment year beginning on or after 01.04.2020 shall, at the option of such person, be taxed @ 22% subject to satisfaction of the conditions contained in section 115BAA(2) of the Act, for which, the assessee company was required to submit Form 10-IC electronically on or before the due date of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act and if such option is exercised the same shall apply to the subsequent assessment years. The assessee instead of Form 10-IC inadvertently uploaded Form 10-IB, which was then subsequently uploaded on 23.01.2025 vide acknowledgment No.836601200230125 on the ITBA portal for rectifying the inadvertent error. The assessee contends that it was merely a clerical error for which the assessee ought not to be denied the benefit of concessional tax rate u/s 115BAA of the Act when the assessee satisfies the conditions prescribed under sub section (2) of section 115BAA of the Act. The Learned Authorized Representative (“Ld. AR” for short) for the assessee relied on a catena of decisions in support of the assessee’s contention along with the CBDT circular which are cited herein under for ease of reference:

“1. CBDT Circular No. 17 of 2024 2. Madison Communications (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (162 Taxman 280-Mumbai Tribunal) 3. A. C. Surgipharma (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (157 Taxman 360 Delhi HC)

4.

[2022] 140 taxmann.com 223 stating that it was a case where filing declaration u/s 10(B)(8) of the Act in accordance with the provision of section 10(B)(5) of the Act, which is to verify the correctness of the claim by the assessee at the time of filing of return for claiming exemption u/s 10(B) of the Act, in which not only the same is mandatory but also the time limit for filing the declaration was also held to be mandatory for granting relief to the assessee but here in the present case it was for availing benefit of concessional rate of tax @ 22% by filing Form 10-IC subject to satisfaction of the conditions prescribed in the provision. It was further held that the delay in filing the Form 10-IC ought to be condoned and that the provision of section 119(2)(b) of the Act are intended to solve the grievances and hardship caused to the assessee which in fact had relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of R. Seshammal v. ITO [1999] 237 ITR 185 (Madras) according to which the Board is vested with powers to render justice in circumstances of limitations, where the Board has arbitrarily rejected the assessee’s request for refund. This emphasizes that the Courts have taken a liberal view in condoning the delay in filing Form 10-IC by avoiding rejection of the claim on mere technicalities. We also draw support from the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of KGY Glass Industries (P.) Ltd. (supra) where it had condoned the delay in uploading Form 10-IC on ITBA portal due to technical error with no fault of the assessee. Here in the present case there can be no denial that the assessee intended to comply with the conditions but had faulted by uploading Form 10-IB instead of Form 10-IC which are prone to happen and due to such technical error the assessee cannot be left remediless, rather allow the assessee to rectify the error when the assessee is entitled to claim concessional rate of tax as per section 115BAA of the Act, otherwise if it satisfies the other conditions stipulated by law. We, therefore, deem it fit to direct the Ld. AO to consider the Form 10-IC which was subsequently filed by the assessee by condoning the delay in uploading the said form and to allow the assessee’s claim of concessional tax rate if the assessee, otherwise satisfies the conditions enumerated as per the provisions of law.