Mandamus for extension of return filing time fails when a later application is already granted and the earlier request becomes infructuous.

A writ of mandamus cannot be used to compel disposal of an earlier extension request under section 139(3) of the Income-tax Act where a later application for the same relief has already been acted on and the extension granted in substance. Once the subsequent application was allowed, the earlier request ceased to survive and no subsisting duty remained to be enforced. The court also noted that the request was made under the pre-amendment version of section 139(3), when discretion to grant extension existed. The petition was rejected because the earlier application had become infructuous.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ of mandamus could be issued to compel disposal of an earlier application for extension of time to file a return under section 139(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, when a later application on the same subject had already been acted upon and the earlier application had become infructuous.

Analysis: The earlier request for extension ceased to survive once the assessee made a subsequent application for the same relief and the authority granted extension on that later application. In such circumstances, there was no subsisting duty to be enforced in relation to the earlier application. The Court also noted that the application was made under the pre-amendment version of section 139(3), under which discretion to grant extension had earlier existed.

Conclusion: No mandamus could be issued on the earlier application because it had become infructuous after the subsequent application was disposed of and the requested relief was already granted in substance. The petition was rejected.

---