Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
G. NARENDAR, KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA, JJ.
The Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society – Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition Nos. 8011, 8012, 8017, 8018, 8023, 8024, 8031, 8032, 8043, 8044, 8056, 8278, 8310, 8313, 8316, 8318, 8320, 8322 of 2024
Decided On : 19-08-2024
Income Tax - Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 119(2)(b) - The court emphasized the binding nature of the Supreme Court's orders regarding the extension of limitation periods due to COVID-19, leading to the reconsideration of applications for condonation of delay in filing returns.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, primarily agricultural cooperative societies, sought to condone delays in filing tax returns for the assessment year 2021-2022 due to COVID-19 disruptions. Their applications were rejected by the competent authority, prompting the appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the competent authority failed to consider the Supreme Court's orders extending limitation periods during the pandemic, which warranted a reconsideration of the applications under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act.
Issues: Whether the authority was correct in rejecting applications for condonation of delay in filing returns under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, considering the Supreme Court's directives on limitation due to COVID-19.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Supreme Court's orders regarding the extension of limitation periods during the pandemic are binding and must be considered in the evaluation of applications for condonation of delay.
Result: The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remitted for reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court's directions.
ORDER :
1. Heard learned counsel, Sri Kedarnath, representing on behalf of learned counsel Sri P. Rama Sharana Sharma, representing the learned counsel for appellants, Sri Y.V. Anil Kumar, learned Central Government Counsel, representing for the 1st respondent and Sri Vijay Kumar Punna, learned Central Government standing counsel representing for the 2nd respondent.
2. The short point that arises in all the petitions is that whether the authority was right in rejecting the applications preferred under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act seeking to condone the delay in filing the returns for the assessment year 2021-2022. We have perused the order passed by the competent authority on the applications. The applications by the assesse were preferred invoking the provisions of clause (b) of sub-section 2 of section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, praying to condone the delay in the filing of returns for the assessment year 2021-2022 and thereby, enabling them to claim deduction under Section 80P of the Act.
3. The status of petitioners’ society is not disputed. The petitioners’ society are all Primarily Agricultural Cooperative Societies (PACS) registered under the Cooperative Societies Act and are engaged in the business of extending financial assistance (loans) to its members. The fact that the society is part of the credit cooperative structure and extends financial assistance only to its members is a fact that can be prima facie inferred from the pleadings.
4. The case of the petitioners is that during the period from around January, 2020 and there onwards, the presence of corona virus came to be detected in the country and a notification came to be issued in March, 2020 by the competent authority under National Disaster Management Act whereby the rampaging corona virus was declared as a calamity and orders came to be issued, drastically regulating daily life of the citizens whereby citizens were even prohibited from venturing out doors. It is also not in dispute that the prohibition continued to be in operation till the end of the year 2020 and 2021 also and it is common knowledge that the virus started withering in the fourth quarter of 2021.
5. The fact that normal life was completely disrupted and thrown out of gear needs no reiteration. In fact, that said aspect of the matter came to be taken up by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020. The Hon’ble Apex Court acknowledging the circumstances and the statutory requirement, severely curtailing moment of men and material and also severe curtailment of modes of transportation more especially public transports and addressing the unique situation of limitation, was pleased to issue orders/directions whereby the limitations under the various Acts, Statutes, Rules etc., came to be extended from time to time and the last such order came to be passed on 10.01.2022, which reads as under:
2. On 23.03.2020, this Court directed extension of the period of limitation in all proceedings before Courts/Tribunals including this Court w.e.f. 15.03.2020 till further orders. On 08.03.2021, the order dated 23.03.2020 was brought to an end, permitting the relaxation of period of limitation between 15.03.2020 and 14.03.2021. While doing so, it was made clear that the period of limitation would start from 15.03.2021.
3. Thereafter, due to a second surge in COVID-19 cases, the Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA) intervened in the Suo Motu proceedings by filing Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 seeking restoration of the order dated 23.03.2020 relaxing limitation. The aforesaid Miscellaneous Applicat
The Supreme Court's directives on limitation during the COVID-19 pandemic are binding and must be applied in tax return filings.
The Supreme Court's directives on limitation during the COVID-19 pandemic are binding and must be considered in tax return filings.
The court established that the limitation period for filing appeals under the Goa Value Added Tax Act is subject to exclusion during extraordinary circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic, as dire....
The court established that the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 is excluded from the limitation calculation due to the COVID-19 pandemic, allowing for the condonation of delay in filing appeals u....
The distinction between extension and exclusion of limitation periods under the Limitation Act was clarified, emphasizing that the period during the COVID-19 pandemic is excluded from the limitation ....
The court ruled that pandemic-related limitation exemptions do not apply to suits where the limitation period expired before the onset of the lockdown.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
