Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2025 (7) TMI 515 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Company loses concessional tax rate under Section 115BAB for filing Form 10ID beyond statutory deadline The ITAT Raipur upheld the disallowance of concessional tax rate under Section 115BAB after the assessee failed to file Form 10ID within the statutory ...
                          Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                              Company loses concessional tax rate under Section 115BAB for filing Form 10ID beyond statutory deadline

                              The ITAT Raipur upheld the disallowance of concessional tax rate under Section 115BAB after the assessee failed to file Form 10ID within the statutory deadline. The assessee filed their first return for AY 2021-22 on 24.02.2022 but submitted Form 10ID only on 21.09.2024, well beyond the due date. The tribunal emphasized that quasi-judicial authorities must strictly interpret fiscal statutes literally, without deviation from legislative intent. The CPC's rejection of the lower tax rate claim was deemed correct as the mandatory compliance requirement was not met. The CIT(Appeals)/NFAC order was upheld.




                              The core legal questions considered in the appeal are:

                              1. Whether the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity and without observing principles of natural justice.

                              2. Whether the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was correct in confirming the disallowance of the claim for concessional tax rate under section 115BAB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and upholding the rejection of Form 10ID by the CPC, Bangalore, despite the assessee's claim of compliance with conditions and timely exercise of option under sub-section (2) read with sub-section (7) of section 115BAB.

                              3. Whether the impugned order is legally and factually sustainable.

                              Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                              Issue 1: Alleged violation of principles of natural justice by deciding appeal ex-parte

                              The appellant contended that the CIT(Appeals) decided the appeal without providing adequate opportunity of hearing, thereby violating principles of natural justice. However, the Tribunal's order does not record any finding in favour of this contention. The appeal was dismissed on merits, indicating that the procedural aspect was either complied with or not found to be prejudicial to the appellant. No specific evidence or finding was discussed regarding denial of opportunity. Thus, this ground was not upheld.

                              Issue 2: Validity of disallowance of concessional tax rate claim under section 115BAB

                              Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: Section 115BAB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, provides for a concessional tax rate of 15% on total income of a domestic company subject to specified conditions. Crucially, sub-section (7) mandates that the option to avail this concessional rate must be exercised in the prescribed manner on or before the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139 for furnishing the first return of income for any previous year relevant to the assessment year commencing on or after 1st April 2020. The option, once exercised, applies to subsequent assessment years and cannot be withdrawn.

                              Other conditions under sub-section (2) include incorporation date, commencement of manufacturing or production, restrictions on use of previously used machinery or buildings, and the nature of business activities.

                              Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal emphasized the strict and literal interpretation of the statutory provision, particularly sub-section (7). It held that the filing of Form 10ID (the prescribed manner of exercising the option) must be done on or before the due date for filing the first return of income relevant to the assessment year commencing on or after 1 April 2020.

                              The assessee's first return for AY 2021-22 was filed on 24.02.2022, which was the relevant first return for the purposes of section 115BAB(7). However, Form 10ID was filed electronically only on 21.09.2024, which was well beyond the due date of the first return.

                              Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee failed to comply with the mandatory requirement of timely filing of Form 10ID, rendering the option invalid as per the clear statutory mandate.

                              Key Evidence and Findings: The ITBA portal records confirmed the dates of filing of the first return and Form 10ID. The assessee's claim that the option was exercised in the year of commencement of manufacturing (2024) was not supported by the prescribed procedural compliance.

                              Application of Law to Facts: Since the option was not exercised within the statutory timeline, the concessional tax rate under section 115BAB could not be allowed. The CPC/AO's disallowance and CIT(Appeals)' confirmation were therefore upheld as per the statutory mandate.

                              Treatment of Competing Arguments: The assessee argued compliance with conditions and timely exercise of option in the year manufacturing commenced. The Tribunal rejected this on the ground that the statute explicitly requires the option to be exercised by the due date of the first return of income relevant to the assessment year commencing on or after 1 April 2020, irrespective of the year manufacturing commenced. The Tribunal underscored that fiscal statutes must be interpreted strictly and literally, leaving no room for deviation from the statutory language.

                              Issue 3: Overall legality and factual correctness of the impugned order

                              The Tribunal found no infirmity in the impugned order. The order was consistent with the statutory provisions and facts on record. The procedural and substantive aspects were found to be in accordance with law.

                              Significant Holdings:

                              "It is crystal clear that in order to take benefit of the said provision, the assessee needs to file Form 10ID on or before the due date specified as per sub section (1) of Section 139 of the Act for furnishing the return of income for the first assessment year commencing on or after 1st day of April, 2020."

                              "The quasi-judicial authority has to follow the mandate of the statute in its strictest form and provide always literal interpretation of the provision. The quasi-judicial authorities while interpreting fiscal statutes cannot interpret the provision in a way other than the way it is provided in the statute itself."

                              "Since the mandate of the provision is not complied with, therefore, the CPC/A.O had rightly denied the benefit of concessional tax rate to the assessee as per Section 115BAB of the Act."

                              Core Principles Established:

                              - The option to avail concessional tax rate under section 115BAB must be exercised strictly in accordance with the timeline prescribed under sub-section (7), i.e., on or before the due date of filing the first return of income relevant to the assessment year commencing on or after 1 April 2020.

                              - Failure to comply with this mandatory procedural requirement results in the option becoming invalid and denial of concessional tax benefits.

                              - Fiscal statutes are to be interpreted literally and strictly, with the intention of the legislature discerned from the plain language of the statute.

                              - Quasi-judicial authorities must adhere to the statutory mandate without extending or curtailing benefits beyond what is provided in the law.

                              Final Determinations:

                              1. The appeal on the ground of violation of natural justice was not upheld.

                              2. The claim for concessional tax rate under section 115BAB was correctly disallowed due to non-compliance with the mandatory condition of timely filing of Form 10ID.

                              3. The impugned order was legally and factually sustainable and was accordingly upheld.


                              Full Summary is available for active users!
                              Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                              Topics

                              ActsIncome Tax
                              No Records Found