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

Hydraguard International Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corp. Ward.2(3), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 2103/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2103/Chny/2024 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Hydraguard International Pvt. Ltd. Ito #86, Polyhose Towers, 8Th Floor, बनाम/ Corporate Ward-2(3) Western Ring, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcp-7219-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S.M. Khaja Muyeenuddeen (Ca)– Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan(Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07-11-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07-11-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. In This Appeal, The Assessee Seeks Application Of Correct Rate Of Tax. The Impugned Order Has Been Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] On 07-06-2024 In The Matter Of An Intimation Issued By Cpc U/S 143(1) On 18-12-2021. 2. Upon Perusal Of Impugned Order, It Could Be Seen That In Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020-21, The Assessee Opted For Taxation In Terms Of Sec.115Baa @22%. The Assessee Declared Income

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Khaja Muyeenuddeen (CA)– Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan(Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)

M/S. Chola Business Services Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward 1 (3), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1167/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1167/Chny/2024 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2021-22 M/S. Chola Business Services Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, Super B-4, C54-55, Chola Crest, Vs. Corporate Ward-1(3), Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Chennai. Guindy Industrial Estate, Chennai – 600 032. [Pan: Aaccc 5400D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Sanjeev Aditya, C.A Ghथ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.10.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Jagadish, A.M : Aforesaid Appeal Filed By The Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2021-22 Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/Jcit(A)-2, Gurugram [Hereinafter “Cit(A)”] Dated 23.02.2024 Vide Intimation U/S. 143(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Issued By Cpc, Bengaluru Dated 20.10.2022. :- 2 -: 2. The Only Effective Ground In This Of Appeal Of Assessee Is Against

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Aditya, C.A GHFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 139Section 143(1)

Makevale Acrylics Private Limited, Vadodara vs. The ADIT, CPC Bengaluru Present Juridiction the DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 566/AHD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.566/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2021-22 Makevale Acrylics Pvt.Ltd. The Adit, Cpc Bengaluru बनाम/ 372, 373, 374, 1,2 Sankarda Present Jurisdiction - Bhadarwa Road The Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1), V/S. At Moxi, Tal.Savli, Vadodara – 390 007 Vadodara- 391 780 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aafcm 2737 E अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Natha Bhalekar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 08/08/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/08/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Dated 27/05/2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)” In Short] Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 13/11/2022 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Makevale Acrylics Pvt.Ltd. Vs. The Adit, Cpc Bengaluru Present Jurisdiction The Dcit, Circle-2(1)1A) Asst. Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Natha Bhalekar, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)