Court sets aside delay condonation order after 20 years due to unavailability of records, directs fresh decision.

The Court held that the delay condonation applications should have been decided within the time provided by the Act when filed in 1998, as all records would have been available then. The order passed after more than 20 years, citing unavailability of records, was set aside. The Principal Commissioner was directed to decide the applications afresh, making efforts to reconstruct the record with the petitioner's assistance and all available records. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations.

---

---

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the delay in filing Income Tax returns for the assessment years of 1994-95 & 1995-96, the condonation of delay applications, and the availability of records for decision-making.

Delay in Filing Income Tax Returns:
The petitioner filed Income Tax returns for the assessment years of 1994-95 & 1995-96 with a delay of 1095 days & 730 days respectively, beyond the last dates of filing. The returns were accompanied by delay condonation applications.

Condonation of Delay Applications:
The petitioner's counsel argued that circulars under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act authorized officials to condone delays, and a similar circular was in existence at the time of filing the returns. It was contended that timely condonation would have allowed for a decision on merits, and the delay should not be used as a reason for non-decision.

Availability of Records for Decision-making:
The Department's counsel argued that the returns were not filed within the provided limitation period, making them non-est returns. However, they expressed willingness to reconstruct the record, including TDS receipts, with the petitioner's cooperation and to afford a proper hearing to the petitioner.

Judgment:
The Court held that the delay condonation applications should have been decided within the time provided by the Act when filed in 1998, as all records would have been available then. The order passed after more than 20 years, citing unavailability of records, was set aside. The Principal Commissioner was directed to decide the applications afresh, making efforts to reconstruct the record with the petitioner's assistance and all available records. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations.

---