Section 115BAA of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.200, 205

Section 115BAA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 200 (Tax on income of certain domestic companies) and section 205 (Conditions for tax on income of certain companies and cooperative societies) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 200 of the 2025 ActRead section 205 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 115BAA is CIT v. Fine Jewellery (India) Ltd. (372 ITR 303), cited in 93 of the 225 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 115BAA

CIT v. Fine Jewellery (India) Ltd.
372 ITR 303 · 2015 · High Court
93
citing judgments

An assessment order is not erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue merely because it does not explicitly discuss an issue for which the Assessing Officer had raised queries and the assessee had provided a response. In such a scenario, the Principal Commissioner cannot invoke revisionary powers under Section 263.

Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. v. CIT
123 ITR 429 · 1980 · Supreme Court
70
citing judgments

Payments that are compensatory in nature, such as interest paid for the delayed payment of statutory dues like cess, are an allowable business deduction under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act. Such payments are not considered a penalty for an infringement of law.

Triveni Engg. Works Ltd. v. CIT
144 ITR 732 · 1983 · High Court
61
citing judgments

Interest on arrears of tax is compensatory in nature, not penal, and is therefore an allowable deduction under the Income-tax Act. This decision reversed a previous Full Bench ruling.

Kumar Jagdish Chandra Sinha v. CIT
220 ITR 67 · 1996 · Supreme Court
23
citing judgments

A revised return cannot be used to rectify a deliberate omission or wilful mistake made in the original return.

CIT v. Strawboard Manufacturing Company Limited
177 ITR 431 · 1989 · Supreme Court
22
citing judgments

Laws providing tax concessions to encourage industrial activity are to be liberally construed. This principle is applied to ensure that the object of such beneficial provisions is achieved.

10B in Pr. CIT v. Wipro Ltd.
288 Taxmann 491 · 2022 · Supreme Court
22
citing judgments
Manoj Ahuja (Minor) & ANR. v. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner
150 ITR 696 · 1984 · High Court
17
citing judgments

An assessee cannot suffer due to a mistake made by their auditor or counsel. The courts will condone delays or delete additions made on account of such errors if reasonable cause is shown.

Vinit Ranawat v. ACIT
88 Taxmann.com 428 · 2017 · Reported
16
citing judgments

No income tax addition can be made based on documents seized from a third party if there is no corroborative evidence or business connection linking the assessee to that third party.

CIT v. Sunita Dhaddha
100 Taxmann.com 526 · 2018 · Supreme Court
15
citing judgments
Aprameya Engineering Ltd. v. ITO
164 Taxmann.com 740 · 2024 · ITAT
15
citing judgments

Delay in filing Form 10-IC, which is a procedural requirement for claiming the benefit of section 115BAA, should not invalidate the assessee's substantive right to such benefit.

Judgments on Section 115BAA

Pancham Studio Pvt. Ltd, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 591/CTK/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Sept 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Gopalan Gurusamyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.591/Ctk/2026 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Pancham Studio Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito, Ward-1(1), Bhubaneswar At-Plot No.149, Po/Ps- Rudrapur, Bhubaneswar 752101, Khordha Pan No. : Aaccp0144M (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररतीकीओरसे /Assessee By : Shri P. K. Mishra, Ar रधजस्वकीओरसे /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R. सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 09/09/2026 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09/09/2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Addl/Jcit(A)-12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] In Appeal No. Addl/Jcit(A)-12, Mumbai/10046/2019-20 Dated 17.03.2026 For The Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Shri P. K. Mishra, Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R. Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue. 3. A Perusal Of The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A) Clearly Shows That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee On The Ground That The Assessee Did Not File Form 10-Ic Required Under Rule 21Ae Of The Income-Tax Rules, 1962, For Domestic Companies Choosing To Pay Tax At A Concessional Rate Of 22% U/S 115Baa. The Assessee

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 115B