Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune
Srsanved Aadimaya Industries Private ... vs Income Tax Officer, Sangli on 5 March, 2026
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCH "SMC", PUNE
BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT
ITA No.2347/PUN/2025
Assessment year : 2020-21
Srisanved Aadimaya Industries Pvt. Ltd. ITO, Sangli
Block J 41, MIDC-Kupwad, Kupwad
Vs.
MIDC Area S.O.,
Sangli - 416436
PAN: ABBCS4977K
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri Pramod S Shingte
Department by : Shri Arvind Renge, Addl. CIT (virtual)
Date of hearing : 04-03-2026
Date of pronouncement : 05-03-2026
ORDER
PER R.K. PANDA, VP:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 09.09.2025 of the Ld. Addl / JCIT(A), Bhubaneswar relating to assessment year 2020-21.
2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a company and filed its return of income on 13.02.2021 opting the provisions of section 115BAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). However, the assessee did not file Form No.10-IC for which the CPC while processing the return of income u/s 143(1) of the Act computed the tax liability @ 30% instead of 22%. 2 ITA No.2347/PUN/2025
3. Before the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A) it was submitted that filing of Form 10-IC is a procedural requirement which need not be considered to be fatal to the claim of concessional rate of tax u/s 115BAA of the Act particularly when the assessee company has chosen the said tax regime in the income tax return itself. It was submitted that opting of section 115BAA(5) in row in ITR-6 by the company is a complete expression of interest by the company that it is opting to pay tax under the simplified tax regime. It was further submitted that it was an era of Covid pandemic due to which there was communication gaps among the team members. It was submitted that in ITR-6 there was no column asking the date of submission of Form No.10-IC which could reduce the possibility of such mistakes. It was submitted that in case of individuals / HUFs opting for new taxation scheme u/s 115BAC, the portal asks for acknowledgement number of 10-IE while filing the ITR being a mandatory column and the assessee cannot continue the process of filing of ITR without filing the same. Even if there would be non-compliance in filing of Form No.10-IE, the assessee would become aware of such requirement and will submit the same. However, in case of filing of Form No.10-IC there is no such column for which it caused trouble. Relying on various decisions it was reiterated that non-submission of Form No.10-IC is a procedural mistake on part of the assessee without any loss to the Revenue. Alternatively and without prejudice to the above it was argued that since the turnover of the company is less than Rs.400 crores, therefore, the applicable rate of tax is 25% excluding the education cess as per the Finance Act.
3ITA No.2347/PUN/2025
4. However, the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A) was not satisfied with the arguments advanced by the assessee and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee by observing as under:
5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:
1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A), NFAC erred confirming the action of the Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as the ADIT) of determining tax liability at the rate of 30% as against the claim of the appellant that it be taxed either:
a. As per the tax regime u/s 115BAA as per the return filed by it OR b. As per the Tax Regime as per the Finance Act, 2022 applicable to companies having turnover for AY 2020-21 below Rs.400 crores i.e. @25% Excluding SC and Cess).
The appellant prays that the ADIT be directed to determine the tax liability applying the correct tax rate.
The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify, delete or add a new ground of appeal before or at the time of hearing.
6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the same arguments as made before the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A) and submitted that when the assessee filed its return 4 ITA No.2347/PUN/2025 of income opting for provisions of section 115BAA for concessional rate, non- submission of Form No.10-IC being a procedural requirement, is not fatal for allowing the claim of lower tax. Referring to the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Akash Fishmeal & Fishoil Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO vide ITA No.2496/PUN/2024 order dated 16.04.2025 for assessment year 2023-24, he submitted that the Tribunal, following the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Fastner Commodeal (P.) Ltd. (2025) 172 taxmann.com 573 (Cal) restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to give an opportunity to the assessee to upload Form 10-IC by stating that the Revenue should condone such delay and allow the assessee to opt for taxation u/s 115BAA of the Act.
7. Referring to the decision of the Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Aprameya Engineering Ltd vs. ITO reported in (2024) 164 taxmann.com 740 (Ahmedabad-Trib.), he submitted that the Tribunal in the said decision has held that where the assessee's intention to opt for lower tax rate under section 115BAA was unambiguously declared in tax audit report which was filed before due date specified under section 139(1), lower authorities had erred in denying benefit of lower tax rate on account of delay in filing Form No.10-IC.
8. Referring to the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of JSW Minerals Trading (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO reported in (2025) 172 taxmann.com 47 (Mumbai-Trib.), he submitted that the Tribunal in the said decision has held that 5 ITA No.2347/PUN/2025 where the assessee-company filed return seeking option under section 115BAA and paid tax at prevalent tax rate of 22 per cent, however, Form 10-IC was not submitted before prescribed time, since there was no dispute with respect to assessee's eligibility for lower tax and Form was submitted within time frame laid by Circular No.19/2023, Assessing Officer was to be directed to take on record Form 10-IC and adjudicate the issue.
9. Referring to the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of KN Support Services (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT reported in (2025) 178 taxmann.com 368 (Delhi-Trib.), he submitted that the Tribunal in the said decision has held that where the assessee-company, engaged in providing software development and IT consulting services, opted for concessional tax rate under section 115BAA and filed Form 10-IC after due date of filing of return under section 139(1), since the assessee had acted in bonafide manner in claiming option of concessional tax under section 115BAA and tax had also been paid at 22 per cent in accordance with provisions of section 115BAA, delay in filing of Form 10-IC being a procedural requirement, should not invalidate assessee's right to claim benefit of section 115BAA. He accordingly submitted that the assessee should be given an opportunity to file Form No.10-IC before the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer be directed to condone the delay and allow the claim of the assessee.
10. The Ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A).
6ITA No.2347/PUN/2025
11. I have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. I have also considered the various decisions cited before me. It is an admitted fact that the assessee in the return of income filed on 13.02.2021 has chosen the lower tax regime in the income tax return itself. However, the assessee failed to furnish Form No.10-IC for which the CPC while processing the return of income u/s 143(1) of the Act computed the tax liability at 30% instead of 22%. I find the Ld. Addl. / JCIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee, the reasons of which have already been reproduced in the preceding paragraphs. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that although the assessee has not filed Form No.10-IC along with the return of income, however, it is an admitted fact that the assessee in the return filed in ITR-6 has opted for the provisions of section 115BAA(5) of the Act and paid taxes accordingly. It is also an admitted fact that the time when the original return of income was filed was during the Covid period.
12. I find an identical issue had come up before the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Akash Fishmeal & Fishoil Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (supra), where the Tribunal, following the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Fastner Commodeal (P.) Ltd. (supra), has restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to give an opportunity to the assessee to upload Form 10-IC and allow the assessee to opt for taxation u/s 115BAA of the 7 ITA No.2347/PUN/2025 Act by condoning the delay. The relevant part of the decision from para 12 onwards read as under:
"12. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. Addl / JCIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered various decisions cited before us. It is an admitted fact that due to non furnishing of Form 10-IC, the CPC processed the return on 21.05.2024 by computing the tax at normal rate as against the lower rate computed by the assessee as per the provisions of section 115BAA of the Act. We find the Ld. Addl / JCIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee, the reasons of which have already been reproduced in the preceding paragraphs.
13. We find the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Fastner Commodeal (P.) Ltd. (supra) while deciding an identical issue has observed as under:
"4. The short issue which falls for consideration in this appeal is whether the assessee should be given an opportunity to file Form 10IC before the Assessing Officer in order to claim the benefit under Section 115BAA of the Act. It is an admitted fact that the assessee did not file the Form 10IC along with the return within the extended period, as extended by the Circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Tax dated 17th March, 2022. The question would be whether filing of such form would be mandatory or directory.
5. Learned Tribunal considered the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and noted the conduct of the assessee and granted leave to the assessee permitting them to file the form and restoring the matter back to the Assessing Officer to consider the report in Form 10IC and allow the relief to the assessee if the assessee fulfils all other requisite conditions as per law. In the Circular issued by the CBDT vide its order Circular No.6 of 2022, dated 17 th March, 2022, the CBDT condoned the delay in filing Form 10IC relevant to the assessment year 2020-21 on fulfillment of certain conditions which are as hereunder :-
1. The return of income for AY 2020-21 has been filed on or before the due date specified under section 139(1) of the Act.
2. The assessee company has opted for taxation u/s 115BAA of the Act in (e) of "Filing Status" in "Part A-GEN" of the Form of Return of Income ITR-6 and
3. Form 10-IC is filed electronically on or before June 30, 2022 or 3 months from the end of the month in which this Circular is issued, whichever is later.
6. The Circular does not specifically state as to whether all three conditions have to be cumulatively complied with or the condition of the 8 ITA No.2347/PUN/2025 assessee can be condoned with regard to partial compliance or part compliance of the conditions in the Circular.
7. Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that the assessee has filed the return of income for the assessment year 2020-21 on or before the due dates specified under Section 139(1) of the Act. Equally, it is not in dispute that the assessee company has opted for taxation under Section 115BAA of the Act. This option was available to the assessee by opting the option given in filing status in Part A- GE of the form by return of income in ITR6. This conduct of the assessee will undoubtedly go to show that the assessee intended to opt to pay tax under the simplified tax regime as also accepted in the Circular issued by the Central Board. Furthermore, during the relevant period there was Covid pandemic which also led to certain other difficulties for the assessee to upload the form along with the return within the extended time thereof. That apart, the assessee has specifically stated that they had certain difficulties in uploading the form in the Income tax portal. One more aspect which the assessee pointed out is that in case of a HUF opting under the new taxation scheme under Section 115BAC, the portal requires management number of 10IE while filing the income tax return as this being a mandatory column and the assessee continue process of filing ITR without filling the same and if there was non-compliance in filing Form 10IE, the assessee would be aware of that and will submit the same but such facilities is not provided when returns are filed by companies.
8. The peculiar facts and circumstances would show that the error was an inadvertent procedural error and the conduct of the assessee will clearly show that they had opted for taxation under Section 115BAA of the Act.
9. Thus, taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case on hand, which we consider to be very peculiar, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Tribunal.
10. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of and the matter stands restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer to permit the assessee to file the report in Form 10IC and the Assessing Officer shall consider as to what relief the assessee would be entitled to subject to the conditions that the assessee fulfils all other requisite conditions as per law.
11. In the result, the appeal stands disposed of with the above direction. The substantial questions of law are left open."
14. We find the various other decisions relied on by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee also supports his case to the proposition that the assessee should be given an opportunity to upload Form 10-IC and the Revenue has to condone such delay and allow the assessee to opt for taxation u/s 115BAA of the Act. 9 ITA No.2347/PUN/2025
15. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Fastner Commodeal (P.) Ltd. (supra), we restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to permit the assessee to file the report in Form 10-IC and consider as to what relief the assessee would be entitled to subject to the condition that the assessee fulfills all other requisite conditions as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes."
13. Since the facts of the instant case are identical to the facts of the case decided by the Tribunal, therefore, respectfully following the said decision, I restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to permit the assessee to file the report in Form 10-IC and consider as to what relief the assessee would be entitled to subject to the condition that the assessee fulfills all other requisite conditions as per law. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
14. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 5th March, 2026.
Sd/-
(R. K. PANDA) VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; दिन ां क Dated : 5th March, 2026 GCVSR 10 ITA No.2347/PUN/2025 आदे श की प्रतितिति अग्रे तिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to:
1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant;
2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent
3. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune
4. DR, ITAT, 'SMC' Bench, Pune
5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file.
आदे शानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 04.03.2026 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 05.03.2026 Sr. PS/PS Draft proposed & placed before the 3 JM/AM Second Member Draft discussed/approved by Second 4 AM/AM Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS Date on which the file goes to the Office 9 Superintendent 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order