Akshay Devendra Birari v. DCIT

164 Taxmann.com 58Reported decision2024#10241 most cited

What is Akshay Devendra Birari v. DCIT authority for?

Failure to file Form 10-IE by the due date does not automatically disentitle an assessee from opting for the new tax regime under Section 115BAC if the form is available with the CPC at the time of processing the return. The requirement of filing Form 10-IE is considered procedural and directory, not mandatory.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Akshay Devendra Birari v. DCIT · Section 115BAC · Section 143(1) · Form 10-IE · new tax regime · procedural requirement · directory · mandatory · CPC processing

Sections most often in play

Section 115BACSection 143(1)Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 115BAC(5)Section 115BAC(5)(i) of the ActSection 115BAC(6)Section 115BBA

Issues it is cited on

section 115bacsection 115bbasection 80jinitial assessment yearsection 139(4)section 115btnmmsection 115section 139(1)section 11section 143(1)reasonable cause

Judgments citing Akshay Devendra Birari v. DCIT

Bhagwandas Surajkaran Somani HUF, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer, Thane

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 8629/MUM/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle HariaFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR
Section 115B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “H(SMC)” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Bhagwandas Surajkaran 8628/Mum/2025 2021-22 Somani HUF, Income Tax Officer, 26, Radhakrishna Circle-1, Soham Gardens, Qureshi Mansion, 8629/Mum/2025 2022-23 Manpada, Gokhale Road, Thane West, Thane West, Maharashtra-400601 Maharashtra. 8627/Mum/2025 2023-24 [PAN: AANHS8839N] For Assessee : Ms. Dinkle Haria For Revenue : Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 11-02-2026 Date of Pronouncement : 16-02-2026 O R D…

Bhagwandas Surajkaran Somani HUF, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer, Thane

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 8628/MUM/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle HariaFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR
Section 115B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “H(SMC)” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Bhagwandas Surajkaran 8628/Mum/2025 2021-22 Somani HUF, Income Tax Officer, 26, Radhakrishna Circle-1, Soham Gardens, Qureshi Mansion, 8629/Mum/2025 2022-23 Manpada, Gokhale Road, Thane West, Thane West, Maharashtra-400601 Maharashtra. 8627/Mum/2025 2023-24 [PAN: AANHS8839N] For Assessee : Ms. Dinkle Haria For Revenue : Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 11-02-2026 Date of Pronouncement : 16-02-2026 O R D…

Bhagwandas Surajkaran Somani HUF, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer, Thane

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 8627/MUM/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle HariaFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR
Section 115B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “H(SMC)” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Bhagwandas Surajkaran 8628/Mum/2025 2021-22 Somani HUF, Income Tax Officer, 26, Radhakrishna Circle-1, Soham Gardens, Qureshi Mansion, 8629/Mum/2025 2022-23 Manpada, Gokhale Road, Thane West, Thane West, Maharashtra-400601 Maharashtra. 8627/Mum/2025 2023-24 [PAN: AANHS8839N] For Assessee : Ms. Dinkle Haria For Revenue : Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 11-02-2026 Date of Pronouncement : 16-02-2026 O R D…

Bhuvana Rajeswari Vijayasankar, Salem vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3379/CHNY/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jan 2026AY 2023-2024

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Manu Kumar Giri

For Appellant: MR. G AKASH, Adv
Section 115Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)

…ough facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Shri Ranganathan Anantharaman vs. DCIT in ITA No.1558/CHNY/2024 and the Pune Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Akshay Devendra Birari reported in 164 Taxmann.com 58 has taken a view that even if concessional rate benefit was not allowed in earlier assessment year for the reason that the return of income for earlier year i.e., assessment BHUVANA RAJESWARI VIJAYASANKAR (Vs.) ITO Ward 1(1) :: 6 :: year 2021-22 was filed belatedly u/s.139(4) of the Act will not preclude the assessee from claiming / opti…

Ajay Sapra, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Vikas Bhawan, Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5007/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 5007/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2023-24 Ajay Sapra, Vs Dcit, B-2, 302, Legend Apartment, Vikas Bhawan, Sector-57, Gurugram, New Delhi-110002 Haryana-122002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Alsps2626R Assessee By: Sh. Ajay Sapra (Assessee) Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.09.2025 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2023-24, Arises Against The Addl./Jcit(A)-6, Chennai’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025-26/1077221533(1) Dated 19.06.2025, In Proceedings U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Sapra (Assessee)For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member ITA No. 5007/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2023-24 Ajay Sapra, Vs DCIT, B-2, 302, Legend Apartment, Vikas Bhawan, Sector-57, Gurugram, New Delhi-110002 Haryana-122002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ALSPS2626R Assessee by: Sh. Ajay Sapra (Assessee) Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 23.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 23.09.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2023-24, arises against the Addl./JCIT(A)-6, Chennai’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1077221533(1)…

Vinayaka Murthy, Bangalore vs. ITO, Ward 3(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 232/BANG/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Paresh S Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 115B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘SMC’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2023-24 Mr. Vinayaka Murthy, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.19/1, 14th Main, 2nd Cross, Ward – 3(2)(1), Bengaluru. KP Agrahara, Magadi Main Road, Bengaluru – 560 023. . PAN – AWDPM 7867 L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Paresh S Shah, CA Revenue by : Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department Date of hearing : 23.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the…

Pukhraj Singh Gujral, Chandigarh vs. CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 637/CHANDI/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Final Hearing

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Monga, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Dr Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCHES, “SMC” CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 637 /Chd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Pukhraj Singh Gujral The CPC बनाम 1528, Sector 36D, Bengaluru Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AALCS8303C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Yogesh Monga, C.A (Virtual) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 03/04/2025 उदघोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 16/04/2025 आदेश/Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M This…

Shrikant Joshi, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Jaipur

Appeal is allowed and impugned order passed by ld

ITA 971/JPR/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Dec 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: This Appellate Tribunal While Challenging Order Dated 17.05.2024 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Passed U/S 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). The Matter Pertains To The Assessment Year 2023-24. As Claimed In The Itr, The Assessee Was In The Business Of Real Estate & Renting

For Appellant: Shri Utkarsh Mishra, CAFor Respondent: MS. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “A-Bench” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k- BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM& SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 971/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2023-24 cuke Shrikant Joshi ITO, Vs. D-40, Madho Singh Circle Bani Park, Ward 1(1), Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AGXPJ 5609 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Utkarsh Mishra, CA jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: MS. An…

Srinivasan Nandagopal, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ncw-1(4), Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1254/CHNY/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl.CIT
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)

…return of income has been filed in time. The same could not be held to be justified from any angle. If the view of Ld. CIT(A) is accepted, the assessee would be precluded forever to claim this concession. The Pune Bench of Tribunal in Akshay Devendra Birari (164 Taxmann.com 58) held that filing of this form was directory in nature. Since the form was made available to CPC at the time of processing of return of income, the benefit thereof would be available to the assessee. Under these circumstances, we direct CPC to provide the impugned benefit and amend the intimation issued to the assessee taking into consider…

Ranganathan Anantharaman, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Ncc-4, Coimbatore

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 1558/CHNY/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1558/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2022-23) Shri Ranganathan Anantharaman Dcit 37/ 2 &3 Sas Garden 2Nd Floor, बनाम/ Non-Corporate Circle-4 Sri Ram Nagar Chokkampudur Road, Coimbatore. Vs. Coimbatore-641 039. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adipr-8127-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) -Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Samuel Pitta (Jcit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji (Advocate) -Ld.ARFor Respondent: Dr. Samuel Pitta (JCIT) -Ld. DR
Section 115BSection 139(4)Section 143(1)

…return of income has been filed in time. The same could not be held to be justified from any angle. If the view of Ld. CIT(A) is accepted, the assessee would be precluded forever to claim this concession. The Pune Bench of Tribunal in Akshay Devendra Birari (164 Taxmann.com 58) held that filing of this form was directory in nature. Since the form was made available to CPC at the time of processing of return of income, the benefit thereof would be available to the assessee. Under these circumstances, we direct CPC to provide the impugned benefit and amend the intimation issued to the assessee taking into consider…