AMAN SINGH,DHANBAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), DHANBAD

Assessee represented by Shri M.K. Choudhary, Adv. Department represented by Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr.DR Date of hearing 24/07/2025 Date of pronouncement 30/07/2025 O R D E R PER: RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, A.M.

as under:

1. Whether appellant is eligible to claim benefit under section 115BAC?

The first and foremost condition to claim benefit under section 115BAC is that that appellant has to file the return within the time allowed u/s 139(1) of the IT Act as mandated under sub section 5 of section 11 5BAC in the prescribed manner, i.e., by exercising the option (by filling the relevant details and manner prescribed) in the form 10IE as required under the rule 21AG of Income Tax Rules 1962. The appellant has NOT filed the return and exercised the option in the form 10-lE within the due date u/s 139(1) of the IT Act and therefore, he is NOT entitled to claim taxation under new regime u/s 11 5BAC. The argument of the appellant that the portal allowed him to file the form 10-IE is not a valid ground because the appellant is aware of the provisions of Act and Rules and that is the reason he had opted for benefit u/s 115BAC which are very clear that the appellant has to file the return within the due date u/s 139(1) of the IT Act and appellant is well aware that he had missed the deadline and despite knowing that filed form 10IE and claimed the benefit u/s 115BAC on the premise that departmental portal allowed him file the said form. He should be remembered that Department 2 Aman Singh Vs ITO has not given such advertisement or display in the portal that those who can file the 10IE are eligible to come under new regime of taxation. Hence, this claim of appellant is self-serving and accordingly rejected and accordingly, the appellant is ineligible to claim benefit of taxation under section 115BAC.

2.0. The next point to be decided, whether appellant is eligible for deductions u/s 80C, 80D and 80TTA? The relevant section dealing with the deductions under chapter VIA is SOAC and the same is reproduced as under. "Deduction not to be allowed unless return furnished. 80AC. Where in computing the total income of an assessee of any previous year relevant to the assessment year commencing on or after- (i) the 1st day of April, 2006 but before the 1st day of April, 2018, any deduction is admissible under Section 80-IA or Section 80-lAB or Section 80-IB or section 80/IC or section 80-ID or section 80-IE; (ii) The 1st day of April, 2018, any deduction is admissible under any provision of this Chapter under the heading "C—Deductions in respect of certain incomes", no such deduction shall he allowed to him unless he furnishes a return of his income for such assessment year on or before the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139 ". 7.2.4. The sub clause (ii) of the section 80AC makes it mandatory that filing return within the due date u/s 139(1) of the Act is a pre-requisite for claiming any deductions under the chapter VIA, including 800, 80TTA, with effect from AY 2019-20. In view of the clear rule position, no deductions u/s 80C, SOD. 80TTA are admissible to the appellant as the AY under question is 2021-22 and thus, no infirmity found with the intimation made in appellant's case u/s 143(1). 8.0. As a result. appeal of the appellant is DISMISSED."

1. For that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is unjustified, illegal and incorrect.

2. For that Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that since the IT portal allowed to file the return under the new regime u/s 115BAC and also allowed to file Form No. 101E under sub-rule(1) of Rule 21AG opting for new regime, even after lapse of due date of filing of return u/s 139(1), for no fault of the appellant, Ld. AO may be directed to accept the return under new regime and calculate tax accordingly. 3 Aman Singh Vs ITO 3. For that even otherwise Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in not appreciating that the statutory provisions of sub-clause (ii) of section 80AC which required return to be filed within due date u/s 139(1) are only in respect of deductions of Chapter VIA under the heading "C- Deduction in respect of certain incomes" only i.e. in respect of 80HHC, 801A etc. and not in respect of deductions under the heading "B.—Deductions in respect of certain payment" i.e. u/s 80C & 80D and deductions under the heading "CA.—Deductions in respect of other incomes" u/s 80TTA. The aforesaid deductions claimed by the appellant amounting to Rs. 1,78,801/- did not fell under heading "C". As such the order passed is unjustified, incorrect, illegal and without any cogent basis.

4. For those other grounds, if any, will be argued/taken up at the time of hearing.

5. Further, during the course of hearing before us, the Ld. AR submitted that either the tax be calculated under the new regime or if not, aforesaid deductions of Rs.1,78,801/- be allowed to the appellant. The ld. AR also submitted following documents through the paper book filed before this Bench: (i) Acknowledgement of Form 10IE filed on 26/03/2022 alongwith copy of Form 10IE exercising option u/s 115BAC (5). (ii) Acknowledgment of Return of Income filed on 28/03/2022 alongwith first page of Return Form ITR-3 (1 of 69), wherein the appellant has exercised option for New Tax Regime u/s 115BAC. (iii) Intimation u/s 143(1) dated 04/08/2022 wherein the tax has been calculated under the Old Regime i.e. New Regime was not allowed. (iv) Receipt of LIC Premium u/s 80C ₹ 2,10,010/- deposited on 10/06/2020. (v) Receipt of Mediclaim Premium u/s 80D ₹ 19,619/- deposited on 22/02/2021. The Ld. AR of the assessee also argued that since the income tax portal allowed to file return under the new regime under Section 115BAC of the Act and accepted Form No. 10IE under sub-rule (1) of Rule 21AG opting for the new regime, the Assessing Officer/CPC should have accepted the return under the new regime and calculated tax accordingly despite the fact that return was Aman Singh Vs ITO filed after the due date. It was further submitted by the ld. AR that the learned Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Hyderabad, erred in not appreciating this fact that the statutory provisions of sub-clause (ii) of Section 80AC which required return to be filed within due date under Section 139(1) are only in respect of deductions of Chapter-VIA under the heading "C- Deduction in respect of certain incomes" only i.e. in respect of 80HHC, 801A etc. and not in respect of deductions under the heading "B—Deductions in respect of certain payment" i.e. u/s 80C & 80D and deductions under the heading "CA.—Deductions in respect of other incomes" u/s 80TTA. The aforesaid deductions claimed by the appellant amounting to Rs. 1,78,801/- does not fall under heading "C". The order passed by the learned Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Hyderabad, therefore, is unjustified and incorrect. Finally, the ld. AR submitted that either in the new regime or in the old regime, the deductions claimed under Chapter VIA of Rs. 1,78,901/- is allowable deductions irrespective of whether the returns of income filed by the appellant was belated one. Further, since the assessee was not given any opportunity to explain the genuineness of the deductions, the CPC/AO was wrong in denying those deductions under Chapter VIA. This is against the principles of natural justice.