SANJU SONI,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), JODHPUR

PDF
ITA 898/JODH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 September 2025AY 2022-23Bench: Dr. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The assessee filed appeals against the orders of CIT(A) for AY 2022-23 and 2023-24, challenging the denial of the new tax regime option under Section 115BAC. The assessee had filed Form 10IE and ITR after the due date for AY 2021-22.

Held

The Tribunal held that the mandate of filing Form 10-IE is directory, not mandatory. The failure to file Form 10-IE within the prescribed due date does not invalidate the assessee's claim of opting for the new regime, especially when the option was exercised in the preceding year and not invalidated due to specified violations.

Key Issues

Whether the assessee is entitled to opt for the new tax regime under Section 115BAC when the ITR and Form 10IE were filed after the due date for the preceding assessment year.

Sections Cited

Section 115BAC, Section 139(4), Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH (VIRTUAL

Before: Dr. MITHA LAL. MEENA & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Soni, Advocate
For Respondent: Smt. Ayushi Sharma, JCIT-DR
Hearing: 08/09/2025Pronounced: 29/09/2025

Result

14.

In view of the above findings, both the appeals deserve to be allowed. Same are allowed. Assessing Officer to do the needful.

Order to be pronounced under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 by placing the details on the notice board. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. Mitha Lal Meena ) (Narinder Kumar ) Accountant Member Judicial Member Date: 29/09/2025 *Santosh Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT(Appeals) (4) The CIT concerned

10 ITA No.898 & 899/Jodh/2024 Sanju Soni, Jodhpur (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T

By Order Asstt. Registrar

SANJU SONI,JODHPUR vs ITO, WARD-1(1), JODHPUR | BharatTax