Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether clause 3 of Circular No. 9/2015, prescribing a six-year outer limit for condonation of delay in refund or similar claims under section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was beyond the Board's power, and whether the petitioner was entitled to relief on a belated claim filed after the permissible period.
Analysis: Section 119(2)(b) empowers the Board to authorize income-tax authorities to admit delayed applications or claims for exemption, deduction, refund, or other relief to avoid genuine hardship. The power to permit delayed claims carries with it the power to prescribe the conditions on which such claims may be entertained. Having invoked the very circular for condonation, the petitioner was bound by its terms. The petitioner neither filed the claim within the normal limitation period nor within the extended period contemplated by the circular, and approached the authority only after more than twelve years. The law of limitation bars the remedy on expiry of the prescribed period.
Conclusion: The circular was upheld, the belated claim was held to be barred by limitation, and the petitioner was not entitled to the requested relief.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory power to condone delay is exercised through a circular or instruction, the authority may validly prescribe reasonable conditions and an outer time limit for entertainment of delayed claims, and a claim filed beyond that limit is barred by limitation.