Condonation of delay in return filing may be inferred from facts, barring a referable question of law.

Belated filing of a return, coupled with a prescribed application seeking extension of time, was treated on the facts as implying condonation of delay and extension of the filing period for carry forward of loss. The Tribunal's approach rested on the factual materials showing that the delay request had not been acted upon by the Income-tax Officer. On that basis, it was concluded that no referable question of law arose under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the request to require a statement of case was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on the facts found, the delay in filing the return could be treated as having been condoned and the time for filing the return as having been extended so as to permit carry forward of loss, and whether any referable question of law arose under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The return for the relevant assessment year was filed belatedly, and the assessee had submitted the prescribed application explaining the delay and seeking extension of time. The Income-tax Officer did not act on that request. The Tribunal, on the materials available, held that the delay must be deemed to have been condoned and the time for filing the return to have been extended, following the view that such an inference could be drawn from the facts on record.

Conclusion: No question of law arose for reference, and the request to direct the Tribunal to state the case was rejected.

---