TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court Overturns Rejection of 36-Day Tax Return Delay, Cites COVID-19 Hardship; Urges Prioritizing Justice Over Technicalities.</h1> <h3>M/s ADCC Infocom Private Limited, Versus The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1, Nagpur. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (Circle 1) Nagpur.</h3> M/s ADCC Infocom Private Limited, Versus The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1, Nagpur. ... Issues involved:The judgment deals with the challenge to the rejection of an application for condonation of delay in filing income tax return for the Assessment Year 2020-2021 by the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur. The issues revolve around the genuine hardship faced by the petitioner due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the reasons for the delay in filing the return.Summary:Challenge to Rejection of Application for Condonation of Delay:The petitioner, a company engaged in Geospatial and Engineering Services, suffered a loss during the Financial Year 2019-2020. The due date for filing the income tax return for the Assessment Year 2020-2021 was extended due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The petitioner filed the return after the extended due date, leading to a delay of 36 days. The application for condonation of delay was rejected by the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur, citing lack of sufficient reasons for the delay.Interpretation of 'Genuine Hardship' under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act:The judgment delves into the interpretation of 'genuine hardship' under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing the need to construe the term liberally. Referring to legal precedents, the Court highlights that the authorities should consider substantive justice and not let technicalities defeat the cause of justice. The power to condone delay should be exercised in cases of genuine difficulty, without presuming deliberate delay or mala fides.Consideration of Circumstances and Professional Mistakes:The Court notes that during the relevant period, the COVID-19 pandemic was at its peak, and the Chartered Accountant of the petitioner faced personal obligations due to a family wedding. Emphasizing that the petitioner should not suffer due to professional mistakes, the judgment cites a previous case where technicality was deemed to triumph over justice. The Court underscores that a delay of 36 days, without any allegation of mala fide intent, should be considered within the realm of 'genuine hardship.'Decision and Setting Aside of Rejection:In light of the circumstances, the Court sets aside the order rejecting the application for condonation of delay. The delay of 36 days in filing the loss return for the Assessment Year 2020-2021 is condoned, emphasizing the need to prioritize substantial justice over technical considerations. The Income Tax Authorities are directed to act accordingly, and the rule is made absolute with no order as to costs.
TaxTMI 