https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757972 Where a domestic company filed its return u/s 139(1) within time and computed tax at the concessional rate under s. 115BAA, the HC held that the substantive exercise of option was evident from the return and computation, and the assessee could not be denied the benefit merely due to delayed filing of Form 10-IC, particularly when the return utility did not provide a clear column to exercise the option as per the relevant CBDT circular. Consequently, the HC quashed the order u/s 119(3)(b) and the intimation u/s 143(1), and remanded the matter to the competent authority to condone the delay in Form 10-IC and enable reprocessing of the return by applying the 22% rate u/s 115BAA. en-us Fri, 23 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jan 2026 12:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757972 Where a domestic company filed its return u/s 139(1) within time and computed tax at the concessional rate under s. 115BAA, the HC held that the substantive exercise of option was evident from the return and computation, and the assessee could not be denied the benefit merely due to delayed filing of Form 10-IC, particularly when the return utility did not provide a clear column to exercise the option as per the relevant CBDT circular. Consequently, the HC quashed the order u/s 119(3)(b) and the intimation u/s 143(1), and remanded the matter to the competent authority to condone the delay in Form 10-IC and enable reprocessing of the return by applying the 22% rate u/s 115BAA. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757972