Back
GOPINATH P.
K. C. Antony, S/o. Late Sri. Chacko – Appellant
Versus
The Principal Commissioner, The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 1, Kochi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that an application filed by the petitioner under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for condonation of delay in filing returns and claiming refund for the Assessment Year 2010-11 was rejected by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax through Ext.P6 order dated 12.4.2021. The petitioner seeks a mandamus commanding the respondents to process the return of income filed by the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2010-2011 and grant to the petitioner the refund of Rs.1,33,470/-claimed by him.
2. The brief facts of the case show that the petitioner, who is an assessee under the Act, did not file his return of income for the Assessment Year 2010-11 within the time specified under Section 139 of the Act. The due date for filing of return, as far as the petitioner is concerned, for the Assessment Year 2010-11 was 31.07.2010 and the last date on which he could have filed his return of income for that year was 31.3.2012. The petitioner filed his return of income only on 13.7.2012. It is the case of the petitioner that the delay in filing the return for the Ass
Application for refund', in this case is the return which was not processed as it was filed beyond the time specified in Section 139 of the Act.
Condonation of delay in filing returns under Section 119(2)(b) strictly governed by prevailing CBDT circulars; independent of Section 148 notice.
The court held that genuine hardship must be assessed for delay applications under Section 119(2)(b), not merely denied based on failure to demonstrate hardship.
The court held that 'genuine hardship' in income tax condonation applications should be construed liberally to prevent injustice caused by technicalities, especially in cases involving medical emerge....
The court ruled that 'genuine hardship' should be construed liberally in tax law for condonation of delays, promoting substantial justice, especially when no liability exists.
The court established that genuine hardship under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act can be recognized based on the specific circumstances of the taxpayer, including age and health, and that the....
The court established that genuine hardship under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act can be recognized based on the specific circumstances of the petitioner, including age and health, and that t....
The court emphasized the necessity for timely consideration of delay condonation applications under the Income Tax Act.
Court emphasized that 'genuine hardship' in tax compliance should be assessed liberally, especially when unforeseen employee turnover disrupts timely filings.
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
