Seema Kulkarni Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
The appeal before the ITAT Pune arose from the order of the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Panaji, for Assessment Year (AY) 2023-24. The assessee, an individual deriving income mainly from profession, filed her return of income on 26.06.2023 declaring income under the new tax regime under Section 115BAC of the Income-tax Act, 1961. While processing the return under Section 143(1), the Central Processing Centre (CPC) denied the benefit of Section 115BAC and raised a tax demand on the ground that Form 10IE for AY 2022-23 had been filed after the prescribed due date.
Findings of the First Appellate Authority
The Additional/JCIT(A) upheld the CPC’s action. It held that Section 115BAC(5) requires the option to be exercised before the due date under Section 139(1), and the requirement was mandatory. According to the appellate authority, filing Form 10IE beyond the prescribed due date disentitled the assessee from the concessional tax regime. Since the assessee was held to be ineligible for the new regime, the computation of tax under the normal provisions and the demand raised by the CPC were considered legally sustainable.
Grounds Before the Tribunal
Before the Tribunal, the assessee contended that once the option under Section 115BAC had been exercised, it continued to apply to subsequent assessment years unless specifically withdrawn under Section 115BAC(5)(i). It was further argued that, since the return for AY 2023-24 had been filed within the due date under Section 139(1), there was no requirement to file a fresh Form 10IE for the year. The assessee relied upon decisions of the Ahmedabad Bench in Arun Gopilal Samnani and the Jodhpur Bench in Sanju Soni, which had decided similar issues in favour of taxpayers. The Revenue supported the order of the first appellate authority.
