Shrikant Joshi Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur)
The appeal was filed by the assessee, a senior citizen of about 84 years of age, against the order dated 17.05.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The matter concerned Assessment Year 2023-24.
The assessee was stated to be engaged in the business of Real Estate and Renting Services-operating real estate of self-owned buildings, both residential and non-residential. The dispute arose because the assessee was denied the benefit of the new tax regime on the ground that Form 10IE for the immediately preceding Assessment Year 2022-23 had been furnished after the prescribed due date.
The assessee had submitted Form 10IE for AY 2022-23, but it was furnished late and was not considered by the department. While filing the return for AY 2023-24, the assessee specified that he had opted to continue with the new tax regime under section 115BAC(5)(i). The assessee also stated that he attempted to upload Form 10IE afresh for AY 2023-24, but the system did not permit him to do so.
The CIT(A) upheld the denial of the new tax regime benefit. Before the Tribunal, the assessee contended that the requirement of furnishing Form 10IE within the prescribed period was directory and that the earlier option should permit continuation into the subsequent assessment year. Reliance was placed on decisions of the ITAT Kolkata, ITAT Amritsar and ITAT Pune.
