INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (PUNE BENCH)
SRSANVED AADIMAYA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED SANGLI – Appellant
Versus
INCOME TAX OFFICER SANGLI – Respondent
ITA 2347/PUN/2025[2020-21]
##PAGE1##
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
O R D E R
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%.
##PAGE2##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.
##PAGE3##3
ITA 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
##PAGE4##4
ITA No
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.