Staubli Tec Systems India Private Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
The appeal concerns the assessee’s challenge to the order of the CIT(A) dated 20 April 2024 for Assessment Year 2020–21. While multiple grounds were raised, the key issue before the Tribunal related to the denial of concessional tax rates under Section 115BAA of the Income-tax Act, attributed to the assessee’s delay in filing Form 10-IC, which is required for opting for the lower tax regime. The assessee had filed its return of income on 11 February 2021 declaring an income of ₹8.70 crore and opted for taxation under Section 115BAA while filing the return. However, Form 10-IC, which must accompany or precede the option, was not filed. During processing of the return, the CPC did not grant the concessional rate because of this omission. The assessee then filed a rectification petition under Section 154, but the CPC rejected it, and the CIT(A) upheld the denial.
The Authorised Representative for the assessee argued that courts and tribunals have consistently held that filing of Form 10-IC is directory and not a strict mandatory requirement and that delays can be condoned. Several judicial precedents were cited, including the Gujarat High Court decision in PCIT v. KGY Glass Industries (2023), and various tribunal orders such as KGY Glass Industries (ITA No. 316/Srt/2022), Aprameya Engineering Ltd v. ITO (2024), and Shivam Wellness Pvt. Ltd. (ITA Nos. 492 & 493/Srt/2023). According to these decisions, an assessee should not be denied Section 115BAA benefits merely due to technical delay in submitting the form, especially when the intention to opt for the regime is evident from the return of income.
