| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 0497 (Karn-HC) : (2020) 314 CTR 0852 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 260A
Order rejecting condonation of delay was cryptic and while deciding the application filed by assessee under section 119(2)(b), claim of assessee was dealt with on merits. Expression 'genuine hardship' should receive liberal consideration and the instant case was a fit case for condonation of delay. Thus, delay in filing the return of income was condoned.
|
Appeal (High Court) - Condonation of delay in filing return - Reasonable cause of delay - Genuine hardship--Condonation of
By way of this appeal, assessee inter alia sought a writ of certiorari for quashment of Order CBDT under section 119(2)(b) and to allow the application submitted by assessee for condonation of delay in filing the return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 on account of circumstances beyond the control of assessee. Held: From the order passed by CBDT, it was evident that CCIT as well as AO had recommended that the delay in filing the return be condoned. Order rejecting condonation of delay was cryptic and while deciding the application filed by assessee under section 119(2)(b), claim of assessee was dealt with on merits. In the considered opinion of this Court that expression 'genuine hardship' should receive liberal consideration, the instant case was a fit case for condonation of delay. Thus delay in filing the return of income was condoned.
REFERRED : B.M. Malani v. CIT & Anr. (2008) 10 SCC 617, Sharavathy Conductors Private Limited v. CCIT (2017) 87 Taxman.com 244 (Karn) : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 5031 (Karn-HC) and Sitaldas K. Motwani v. DGIT (International Taxation) (2010) 187 Taxman 44 (Bom-HC) : 2010 TaxPub(DT) 1180 (Bom-HC).
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.
A.Y. :
IN THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|