Metis Family Offers Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Chennai)
Chennai ITAT: Delay in Filing Form 10-IC Due to Technical Glitch Cannot Deny Concessional Tax Regime
The Chennai ITAT allowed the assessee’s appeal for statistical purposes and set aside the orders of the lower authorities in a case concerning denial of the concessional tax regime under Section 115BAA of the Income-tax Act for AY 2020-21. The assessee had opted for the concessional tax regime in ITR-6 but did not electronically file Form No. 10-IC within the prescribed time, stating that this was due to technical issues on the Income-tax portal. The CPC denied the benefit under Section 143(1), and the rectification application under Section 154 and subsequent appeal were also rejected. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had exercised the option in the return of income, produced the relevant ITR-6 and filed a physical copy of Form No. 10-IC before the Tribunal. Following the decision of the Mumbai Bench in Staubli Tec Systems India Pvt. Ltd. and the Gujarat High Court decision cited therein, the Tribunal held that the concessional tax regime should not be denied merely due to delayed or non-electronic filing of Form No. 10-IC where other statutory conditions are fulfilled. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer to verify the claim and grant the benefit if the prescribed conditions are satisfied after providing an opportunity of hearing.
The Chennai ITAT held that a company cannot be denied the benefit of the concessional tax regime u/s 115BAA merely because Form 10-IC was not electronically filed within the prescribed time due to technical glitches. The assessee had opted for taxation under the concessional regime while filing its ITR-6, but could not upload Form 10-IC because of issues on the Income-tax portal. Consequently, the CPC processed the return under the old tax regime, raised a demand, and rejected the assessee’s rectification application u/s 154, which was also upheld by the CIT(A).
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had consistently maintained that the option under section 115BAA had been exercised in the return itself and had immediately raised a grievance on the portal upon receiving the intimation u/s 143(1). It also observed that the assessee had produced the relevant portion of ITR-6 evidencing the option exercised and had furnished a physical copy of Form 10-IC before the Tribunal.
Relying on the Mumbai ITAT decision in Staubli Tec Systems India Pvt. Ltd. and the Gujarat High Court ruling in PCIT v. KGY Glass Industries (P.) Ltd., the Tribunal held that a procedural lapse, such as delayed or non-electronic filing of Form 10-IC due to technical reasons, should not deprive an assessee of a substantive statutory benefit when all other conditions are satisfied. It set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restored the matter to the AO with a direction to verify the assessee’s eligibility and grant the benefit of the concessional tax regime if the statutory conditions are fulfilled, without rejecting the claim solely for delayed filing of Form 10-IC. The appeal was accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
Cases Discussed:
- Staubli Tec Systems India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT, ITA No. 3968/Mum/2024 (order dated 31.10.2025)
- PCIT v. KGY Glass Industries (P.) Ltd., (2023) 156 taxman.com 18 (Guj.)
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Hyderabad dated 09.02.2026 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2020-21.
