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>Delay condoned for late return; bona fide reason accepted under s.139(1), justice-focused relief granted under s.119(2)(b).</h1> <h3>Magenta EV Solutions Private Limited Versus Central Board of Direct Tax and Ors.</h3> HC held that the assessee company had a bona fide reason for delay in filing its return of income under s.139(1) and that the explanation offered was ... Delay filling Return of income - Condonation application in filing its return u/s 139 (1) - HELD THAT:- We find that there was a bona fide reason for the delay in filing the Return of Income. In the ever emerging challenges and competition, corporate restructuring is a legitimate tool to enhance value of a company. In our opinion, the explanation given for the delay is adequately explained. Time and again, this Court has the taken the view that the Authorities, whilst considering applications under Section 119 (2) (b), ought to take a justice oriented approach rather than a pedantic one. One such decision is in the case of Pushpa Geethan Gada (Legal Heir/Legal Representative of Geethan Damji Gada) [2025 (10) TMI 229 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] No justification for not condoning the delay in filing the Income Tax Return by the Assessee company. We hereby quash and set aside the impugned order. We also hereby condone the delay in filing the Income Tax Return of the Assessee company u/s 139 (1) of the IT Act. Writ petition challenges order dated 2 April 2024 rejecting condonation of a 52-day delay in filing the return under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act for A.Y. 2022-23. The assessee's application under Section 119(2)(b) explained the delay as due to finalisation of books and financial statements in anticipation of a corporate merger process under Section 233 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Revenue relied on record material and multiple opportunities afforded to the assessee, contending that such delay did not constitute sufficient cause. The Court found a 'bona fide reason for the delay' and held that authorities considering applications under Section 119(2)(b) 'ought to take a justice oriented approach rather than a pedantic one.' On that basis the Court concluded there was 'no justification for not condoning the delay,' quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 2 April 2024, and expressly condoned the delay in filing the return under Section 139(1).
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
