<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (8) TMI 1832 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797958</link>
    <description>Timely filing of Form 10-IE for opting into the new tax regime under section 115BAC was treated as sufficient despite a delayed return of income. The timing requirements for Form 10-IE and the return were regarded as directory rather than mandatory, and delay in filing either may be condoned. Consequently, delayed filing of the return after the due date under section 139(1) did not invalidate the taxpayer&#039;s option for taxation under the new tax regime.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2026 08:28:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=919825" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (8) TMI 1832 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797958</link>
      <description>Timely filing of Form 10-IE for opting into the new tax regime under section 115BAC was treated as sufficient despite a delayed return of income. The timing requirements for Form 10-IE and the return were regarded as directory rather than mandatory, and delay in filing either may be condoned. Consequently, delayed filing of the return after the due date under section 139(1) did not invalidate the taxpayer&#039;s option for taxation under the new tax regime.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797958</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>