Concessional tax rate eligibility under section 115BAA was not defeated by filing the wrong form, since the defect was procedural.

Entitlement to the concessional tax rate under section 115BAA was treated as turning on substantive eligibility, not on strict compliance with the prescribed filing form. The assessee had opted for the regime and met the underlying conditions; the only defect was filing Form 10-IB instead of Form 10-IC, which was later corrected. The prescribed form was regarded as a procedural mechanism to operationalise the benefit, so the technical lapse did not defeat the concessional rate where eligibility otherwise existed. Prior departmental acceptance in earlier and subsequent years supported that the dispute was confined to a procedural error, and the assessee was stated to remain entitled to the benefit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to the concessional tax rate under section 115BAA despite having initially filed the wrong form, and whether the procedural defect in filing Form 10-IB instead of Form 10-IC could justify denial of the statutory benefit.

Analysis: The assessee had exercised the option for the concessional regime and satisfied the substantive conditions for taxation at the reduced rate. The defect was confined to filing the wrong form, which was later rectified by filing Form 10-IC. The requirement to file the prescribed form was treated as a procedural mechanism to operationalise the substantive right, and not as a condition whose non-compliance would extinguish the benefit where eligibility otherwise existed. The departmental acceptance of the assessee's tax position in earlier and subsequent years also supported the view that the disputed year involved only a technical lapse. The cited judicial and administrative authorities recognised that procedural defects in filing the prescribed form should not defeat the concessional regime when substantive eligibility is established.

Conclusion: The assessee was held entitled to the concessional tax rate under section 115BAA, and the revenue's challenge to the grant of that benefit failed.

---