The requirement to file Form 10-IC under Section 115BAA of the Income Tax Act is procedural and directory in nature; therefore, the substantive benefit of a concessional tax rate cannot be denied merely on the ground that the form was filed after the due date, provided the assessee's intent was otherwise declared.

आदशे /ORDER

PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 30-09-2025 passed by the Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chandigarh arising out of the intimation order passed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2024-25.

2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a company filed its return of income for the assessment year 2024-25 belatedly on 28.12.2024 admitting total income of Rs. 4,26,53,030/- under New Tax Regime. The return was processed by CPC under the old tax regime which resulted in a tax demand of Rs. 1,30,48,940/-. Aggrieved against the intimation, the assessee filed appeal before Addl./Joint CIT(A), who has confirmed the disallowance on the ground that the assessee opted for new tax regime under section 115BAA of the Act and filed Form No. 10-IC on 28.12.2024. Since both the return of income and Form No. 10-IC have been filed belatedly, the Addl./Joint CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal.

3. Aggrieved against the appellate order, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal:

“1. The order passed by lower authorities are invalid, bad in law and required to be quashed.

2. Ld. JCIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming action of CPC in computing tax at normal rate despite of fact that appellant has filed form 10IC.

3. Ld. JCIT(A) erred in law and on facts in adjudicating ground relating to denial of tax credit ignoring fact that same is reflecting in 26AS.

4. Ld. JCIT(A) ought to have consider judicial precedents and ought to have allowed the claim of appellant to tax at concessional rate.”

4. Heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on the record. It is undisputed fact that Form No. 10-IC was filed by the assessee beyond the due date prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act. The intention of the assessee to disclose the income under the New Tax Regime under section 115BAA of the Act was disclosed in the Tax Audit Report filed by the assessee. In our considered view, the filing of Form 10-IC though mandated in the Act needs to be construed as directory in nature and not mandatory. This view of ours is supported by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Aprameya Engineering Ltd. Vs. ITO reported in 164 taxmann.com 740 (Ahdbd Trib), wherein it was held as follows:

“6. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Section 115BBA of the Act was introduced for the purpose of granting benefit of reduced corporate tax rate for the domestic companies. In order to avail the benefit, such companies are required to exercise the option in prescribed manner on or before due date specified under section 139(1) for furnishing the return of income. As per the rule 21AE of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, such option can be exercised by filing Form 10-IC. Sub-section (5) of Section 115BAA of the Act, makes it mandatory to file this form on or before the due date of furnishing the return of income as specified u/s 139(1) of the Act. In present case, the assessee has filed this form belated i.e. on 1-12-2022.

7. The Ld. CIT(A) in his order has relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Wipro Ltd. (Supra) The case of Wipro Ltd. (supra) was rendered on a different set of facts, wherein in the original return of income the assessee had claimed benefit under section 10B of the Act and thereafter, a revised return of income was filed by the assessee foregoing the claim of benefit of section 10B of the Act. As an afterthought the assessee filed a declaration as required under section 10B(5) of the Act belatedly after the due date mentioned in section 10B(5) of the Act and claimed carry forward of losses under section 72 of the IT Act, withdrawing its claim for deduction under section 10B of the IT Act. In the present case, th