2025 (4) TMI 839 - AT - Income Tax

Denial of benefit of New Tax Regime u/s.115BAC - Admittedly the assessee had filed the option for falling under the New Tax Regime by way of filing Form No.10IE on 10.10.2022 - HELD THAT - The proviso to section 115BAC provides that the option made by the assessee u/s.115BAC(5)(i) of the Act once exercised for any previous year can be withdrawn only for a previous year other than the year in which it was exercised and thereafter the person shall never be eligible to exercise option under this section except where such person ceases to have any income from business or profession in which case option u/s.115BAC(5)(ii) of the Act shall be available. On perusal of the above contents of section 115BAC notice that the assessee has to make the claim once and then it is applicable for subsequent years subject to proviso referred above. In the instant case the assessee furnished a claim on Form No.10IE on 10.10.2022. Admittedly the due date for A.Y. 2022-23 expired prior to filing of Form No.10IE on 10.10.2022 and therefore assessee could not get the benefit of section 115BAC of the Act for the A.Y. 2022-23. As before us the year under appeal is A.Y. 2023-24 and the option furnished in Form No.10IE is much prior to the due date of filing the return u/s.139(1) of the Act for A.Y. 2023-24. The Revenue authorities have not found any discrepancy in the contents of Form No.10IE furnished by the assessee except being belated. As following the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Akshay Devendra Birari 2024 (6) TMI 272 - ITAT PUNE it is the considered view that the assessee has made a valid claim for availing the benefit under the New Tax Regime u/s.115BAC. Appeal of the assessee is allowed.

2024 (6) TMI 272 - AT

ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The core legal issues considered in this judgment include:

Whether the assessee is entitled to the benefit of the New Tax Regime under Section 115BAC of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2023-24, given that Form 10-IE was filed on 10-10-2022.
Whether the requirement to opt for the New Tax Regime again before filing the income tax return for AY 2023-24 is valid.
Whether the denial of a personal hearing through video conferencing constitutes a denial of natural justice.
Whether the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Akshay Devendra Birari vs. DCIT should have been followed.

ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Entitlement to the New Tax Regime under Section 115BAC

Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: Section 115BAC provides special rates of taxation subject to certain conditions, requiring the filing of Form 10-IE before the due date specified in Section 139(1). Once exercised, the option applies to subsequent years unless withdrawn under specific conditions.
Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal noted that the assessee filed Form 10-IE on 10-10-2022, prior to the due date for AY 2023-24. Although the form was filed belatedly for AY 2022-23, it was timely for AY 2023-24.
Key Evidence and Findings: The Tribunal found no discrepancies in the contents of Form 10-IE, apart from its belated filing for the previous year.
Application of Law to Facts: The Tribunal applied the provisions of Section 115BAC, determining that the option exercised by filing Form 10-IE should be valid for AY 2023-24.
Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Departmental Representative supported the lower authorities' decision, but the Tribunal found the assessee's filing to be valid for the relevant assessment year.
Conclusions: The Tribunal concluded that the assessee's claim under the New Tax Regime for AY 2023-24 was valid and should have been granted.

Requirement to Opt Again for the New Tax Regime

Relevant Legal Framework: The option to opt for the New Tax Regime is exercised once and applies to subsequent years, barring specific conditions for withdrawal.
Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal found that once the option is exercised, there is no requirement to opt again for subsequent years unless the option is withdrawn.
Conclusions: The Tribunal held that the requirement to opt again was not valid.

Denial of Personal Hearing

Relevant Legal Framework: Principles of natural justice require an opportunity for a fair hearing.
Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal did not specifically address this issue in detail, focusing instead on the substantive tax regime issue.

Application of Precedent from Akshay Devendra Birari vs. DCIT

Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The Tribunal had previously ruled in a similar case that the filing of Form 10-IE was directory, not mandatory.
Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal followed its prior decision, emphasizing that the form's availability with the CPC should have resulted in the allowance of the New Tax Regime benefit.
Conclusions: The Tribunal set aside the findings of the CIT(A) and allowed the appeal based on the precedent.

SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

Verbatim Quotes of Crucial Legal Reasoning: The Tribunal noted, "The Revenue authorities have not found any discrepancy in the contents of Form No.10IE furnished by the assessee except being belated."
Core Principles Established: The filing of Form 10-IE is directory and not mandatory for the application of the New Tax Regime in subsequent years, provided it is filed before the due date for the relevant assessment year.
Final Determinations on Each Issue: The Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting the benefit of the New Tax Regime to the assessee for AY 2023-24 and directing the jurisdictional Assessing Officer to give effect to this decision.