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 emphasizes genuine hardship in tax return delay case, quashing order and directing reevaluation.</h1> <h3>Kusum Yadav Versus Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jabalpur-1</h3> Kusum Yadav Versus Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jabalpur-1 - TMI Issues involved:The judgment involves the rejection of an application seeking condonation of delay in filing a return under the Income Tax Act, specifically focusing on the aspect of genuine hardship and the authority's discretion to extend the benefit under Section 119(2)(b) of the IT Act.Details of the Judgment:Issue 1: Application for Condonation of DelayThe petitioner, an individual assessee, had claimed refund of excess TDS deducted by a company due to technical glitches in the IT Department Portal. The petition sought condonation of delay in filing return and refund of the excess amount. However, the application was rejected on the grounds of lack of genuine hardship shown by the petitioner.Issue 2: Consideration of Genuine HardshipThe petitioner's counsel argued that the rejection was unjustified as the Chartered Accountant's Affidavit detailed the technical glitch that prevented the timely filing of the return. The Court noted that the competent authority did not adequately consider the Affidavit, which presented compelling reasons beyond the petitioner's control. The Court emphasized the importance of assessing genuine hardship as per Section 119(2)(b) of the IT Act.Issue 3: Non-Application of Mind by the AuthorityThe Court observed that the impugned order lacked a proper application of mind by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jabalpur-1. It was highlighted that a thorough consideration of the Chartered Accountant's Affidavit could have led to a different outcome. Consequently, the Court quashed the order and directed the authority to reevaluate the application, considering all relevant material and recording findings on the existence of genuine hardship within two months.Conclusion:The judgment underscores the significance of demonstrating genuine hardship in seeking condonation of delay in filing returns under the IT Act. It emphasizes the need for authorities to diligently consider all evidence presented, especially when technical glitches are cited as reasons for delays. The decision provides clarity on the process of evaluating such applications and ensures a fair assessment of genuine hardships faced by taxpayers.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
