ORDER :

1. This is the second round of litigation before this Court. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 28.04.2025 passed by the 1^st respondent whereby the request of the petitioner to condone the delay in filing the Return of Income under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2019-2020 has been rejected.

2. The request has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner has not shown a reasonable cause for condoning the delay in filing the Return of Income for the Assessment Year 2019-2020. Relevant portion of the impugned order dated 28.04.2025 is extracted hereunder:-

“9. Thus, no reasonable cause has been shown or established to justify the claim of genuine hardship under section 119(2)(b) of the Act. It has been submitted that the denial to file return of income and the consequent tax demand would cause genuine hardship to it. It should be noted that disallowance of any claim will normally lead to hardship. The legislature has provided time limits for certain obligation under the Act and these time limits have to be observed to be able to claim those deductions. This may not be termed as hardship but it is compliance requirements imposed by law in the interest of proper regulation of the Act. If these time limits were to be relaxed in a particular case on mere fact that a default occurred due to some inadvertence then there will be no sanctity of limitation prescribed by the legislature. Therefore, power of condonation u/s 119(2) can be exercised to deal with the reasonable cause only which would have led to delay in statutory compliance and the same cannot be exercised routinely. Hon'ble Courts have held that there should be reasonable cause & delay should be explained properly. Power conferred u/s 119(2) can't be used to condone the cases where there is no reasonable cause or lack of due diligence on the part of the petitioner.

10. In the case of B.U. Bhandari Nandgude Patil Associates v. CBDT, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has stated that statutory time limits fixed have to be adhered to as it ensures timely completion of assessments. Discipline on time limits regarding filing of return have to be complied and respected, unless compelling and good reasons are shown and established for grant of extension of time. Extension of time cannot be claimed as a vested right on mere asking and on the basis of vague assertions without proof. The assertions made to justify extension of time have to be proved and established. Any indulgence on the pretext that the petitioner has been denied benefit u/s 80-1BA of the Act, which on merits would have been allowed, would be contrary to law, if it is held that there was no reasonable ground or reason for extension of time in filing of return of income.”

3. The last date for filing return under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2019-2020 expired on 31.07.2019. The last date for filing return under Section 139(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 expired on 31.12.2019.

4. However, by the Central Board of Direct Taxes by its Notification extended the last date for filing Return of Income under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to 31.08.2019 and thereafter to 31.10.2019. Thus, the last date for filing Return of Income under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax , 1961 for the Assessment Year expired on 31.12.2019.

5. The petitioner however filed the Return of Income under Section 139(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2019-2020 only on 04.02.2020 with a delay of 95 days which was thereafter processed under Section 143(1) on 29.09.2020. There, the benefit of Section 80IBA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was denied to the petitioner.

6. Under these circumstances, the petitioner approached the 1^st respondent by filing a petition on 29.12.2020 under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for condoning the aforesaid delay of 95 days in filing of Return of Income under Section 1