SIDDHI PROCON PVT LTD,SURAT V. ITO, WARD 2(1)(3), SURAT

ITA 458/SRT/2025

AI Insights

Siddhi Procon Pvt. Ltd. filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which had dismissed their appeal regarding the non-allowance of benefits under Section 115BAA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, due to the late filing of Form 10IC. The assessee argued that technical problems on the Income-tax Portal prevented timely filing, although they managed to file within the extended due date. The Tribunal considered the technical issues and the precedent from the Gujarat High Court, deciding to allow the appeal partly and directing the Assessing Officer to re-evaluate the assessee's return under the MAT provisions if all conditions are met.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 792369 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Appeal Filed On: 17-04-2025
• Other Referred Cases: M/s Camino Herbal Remedies Pvt. Ltd. Vs Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEERJA SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: SURESH K. KABRA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT (Hearing Through Hybrid Mode) BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER ITA No. 458/SRT/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Siddhi Procon Pvt. Ltd., 522, Lalbhai Contractor Complex, Nr. Old Library, Nanpura, Surat-395001 [PAN : AAOCS 6071 J] बनाम/ Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 2(1)(3), Surat (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA Revenue by Ms. Neerja Sharma, Sr DR Date of Hearing 18.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 03.12.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R PER MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order dated 28.02.2025 passed by the ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Visakhapatnam [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)” for short] u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for short] for Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. The solitary grievance raised by the assessee reads as under:- “The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC has erred and was not just and proper on the facts of the case and in law in not allowing the benefit u/s 115BAA and rejecting the filing of Form 10IC and other evidences.” 3. The assessee is a company that filed its return of income for AY 2022-23 on 11.11.2022. The extended due date of filing was 07.11.2022. The audit of the assessee-company was completed on 07.09.2022. Form 10-IC for exercising the option u/s 115BAA was filed on 10.11.2022. The assessee-company opted for Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 458/SRT/2025 Siddhi Procon Pvt Ltd Vs. ITO AY : 2022-23 [2] the tax regime as per Section 115BAA of the Act. The return of income was processed by the CPC, but owing to a delay of three days in filing Form 10-IC beyond the extended due date of 07.11.2022, the return of income was processed under the Regular Tax Regime. Intimation/Order u/s 143(1) of the Act was passed by the Assessing Officer on 07.08.2023.. 4. Being aggrieved by the intimation dated 07.08.2023, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that, during the said period of due date of filing of ITR for AY 2022-23, there was a lot of technical problems faced by the assessee while trying to upload Form 10IC. The screen-shot of the Income-tax Portal has evidenced to the filing of Form 10IC categorically reflected the assignment of Form 10IC to CA before the due date of filing of ITR. The assessee tried every day and finally on 11.11.2022 the assessee could file Form 10IC. The Ld. AR submitted that the late filing of Form 10IC cannot take away the regime under which the assessee is filing the ITR, which is 115BAA of the Act, and thus the assessee should have been granted the benefit of the said section. 6. The Ld. DR submitted that as per the CBDT Circular, the due date of filing was extended till 07.11.2022, but the assessee could not file the required documents within the extended period. Therefore, the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) rightly treated the income and processed the same under the regular tax regime. Thus, the Ld. DR relied upon the intimation order as well as the order of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2024 dated 18.11.2024, the delay in filing Form No.10IC for AY 2020-21, 2021-22 and Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 458/SRT/2025 Siddhi Procon Pvt Ltd Vs. ITO AY : 2022-23 [3] 2022-23 was granted subject to filing of return within the time allowed u/s 139(1) of the Act. In the present assessee’s case, the assessee categorically mentioned that there were technical glitches on Income-tax Portal faced by the assessee while filing Form 10IC and in fact, the return of income was also filed after three days of the extended due date. If the holistic view has been taken by the Assessing Officer/Revenue, it can be seen that the assessee, if filed the said Form 10IC as well as return of income within the stipulated due date, the assessee would have benefited the MAT provisions and the taxation at lower rates. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has condoned the delay in the case of M/s Camino Herbal Remedies Pvt. Ltd. Vs Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax (In R.SCA No. 20564 of 2023, judgment dated 15.07.2025). Thus, in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, it will be appropriate to condone the delay and direct the Assessing Officer to process the assessee’s return in consonance with the provisions of Section 115BAA of the Act after verifying whether all other conditions are fulfilled by the assessee or not. Needless to say, the assessee shall be given an opportunity of hearing by following the principles of natural justice. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced under provision of Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on …03.12.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) (SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad, Dated 03/12/2025 **btk Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 458/SRT/2025 Siddhi Procon Pvt Ltd Vs. ITO AY : 2022-23 [4] आदेश की ितिलिप अ\u0012ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0015 / The Appellant 2. \u0016थ\u0015 / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध , अिधकरण अपीलीय आयकर , /DR,ITAT, Surat, 6. गाड# फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ITAT, Surat 1. Date of dictation …………02.12.2025….. 1. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member :..… 02.12.2025…..… 2. Other Member……02.12.2025…………….. 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S……02.12.2025………… 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement……03.12.2025…………… 5. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S……03.12.2025…………….……… 6. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk………………….…… 7. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk……. 8. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order………… 9. Date of Despatch of the Order Printed from counselvise.com "