IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

WRIT PETITION NO. 37241 OF 2025 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

1. ERIC PRAKASH CYRIL D SA

AGED 58 YEARS,

S/O GRATIAN D'SA,

1-22, PRAKASH VIHAR, BAREBAIL,

BEJAI POST, MANGALORE,

DAKSHINA KANNADA - 575 004.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S.V., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. INCOME TAX OFFICER

INTERNATIONAL TAXATION WARD,

Digitally signed MANGALORE - 575 001.

by

SHARADAVANI

B

2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Location: High

Court of (INTL TAXATION) BENGALURU,

Karnataka

BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD,

6^TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA,

BENGALURU - 560 095

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE AND

SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI, ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR A DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 119(2)(b) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT) DATED 21.08.2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN DIN NO.ITBA/COM/F/17/2025-26/1079823999(1) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2022-23 (ANNEXURE-A).

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

1. In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs;

"1) Issue a writ of certiorari or a direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the order under section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') dated 21/08/2025 passed by the Respondent No.2 in DIN No: ITBA/COM/F/17/2025- 26/1079823999(1) assessment year 2022-23 (Annexure-A). for the ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or a direction in the nature of writ of mandamus directing to the respondents condone the delay in filing the revised return of income for the assessment year 2022-23 and to permit the petitioner to file the revised return of income in order to claim refund in accordance with law.

iii) And pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity."

2. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner being the income tax assessee, the due date for filing of the income tax returns for the assessment year 2022-23 was 31.03.2023 and the petitioner having submitted the returns on 28.07.2022 under the status resident but not ordinary resident, since the petitioner being a non resident Indian.

3. Under these circumstances, the petitioner prepared revised computation of income and returns correctly reflecting his status as non resident, but the time limit for filing such revised returns having expired, the petitioner filed an application seeking condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, which came to be rejected by the respondent vide impugned order dated

21.08.2025 which is assailed in the present petition.

4. It is contended that the delay in filing the revised income tax returns was on account of bonafide reasons unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and the petitioner being a non resident Indian was not in Indian and could not file the revised returns before the due date and it was due to genuine hardship as contemplated in the Circular No.9/2015 dated 09.06.2015 and as such, the impugned order passed by the respondent rejecting the application deserves to be set-aside and application for codonation of delay filed by the petitioner deserves to be allowed.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents supports the impugned order and submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

6. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that the respondents have adopted hyper technical approach in refusing to condone the delay without appreciating that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to file the revised returns within the prescribed period was on account of the undisputed fact that the petitioner was none resident Indian (NRI) and the same was owing to bonafide reason