CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950

Article 226

Writ - Return of income - Delay in filing of return - Condonation of delay

Assessee was a retired bank employee and was paid superannuation benefit. Assessee did not claim exemption under section 10(10C) on the superannuation benefit amount. An assessment order was passed wherein AO stated that no exemption under section 10(10CC) was claimed but only relief under section 89(1) was claimed. Thereafter, assessee made a representation to AO by a Letter stating that amount of superannuation benefit was not taken into consideration for tax exemption. When this was not responded he sought to file a revised return and filed an application seeking condonation of delay under section 119(2)(b). Application was rejected as time-barred on the ground that Circular No. 9 of 2015, dated 9-6-2015 ((2015) 374 ITR (St.) 25) of the CBDT did not permit condoning the delay beyond the period of six years. Held: AO's observation in his assessment order regarding exemption under section 10(10C) indicated that he was aware of non-claiming of the exemption by the assessee. As no order was passed, assessee had decided to explore the possibility of filing a revised return. Circular No. 014 (XL-35), dated 11-4-1955 provides that purpose of this circular was merely to emphasise that no advantage should be taken of assessee's ignorance to collect more tax out of him than is legitimately due from him. In view of Circular No. 014 (XL-35) and the peculiar facts of the case, revised return could be considered. Reasons assigned while seeking condonation of delay were satisfactory. The order rejecting the condonation of delay under section 119(2)(b) was set aside and the delay was condoned.

REFERRED : L. Hirday Narain v. ITO (1970) 78 ITR 26 (SC) : 1970 TaxPub(DT) 0391 (SC) and Ramco Cement Distribution Co. (P) Ltd. v. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (1974) 33 STC 180 (Mad)

FAVOUR : Directions issued.

A.Y. : 2004-05

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT