2025 (4) TMI 1765 - HC - Income Tax

Sufficient cause for condonation should be assessed by continuity of events, not pedantic day-to-day gaps; application allowed.

Section 119(2)(b) permits condonation of delay where a satisfactory explanation shows sufficient cause; the assessment requires coherent continuity of ... Condoning the delay in filing Form-10B u/s 119(2)(b) - “sufficient cause” for delay - earlier rejection was founded upon the technical issue having raised by the authority that instead of submission in Form- 10B, it was filed under Form-10BB HELD THAT:- Neither the Court nor the authority should take up pedantic approach in finding out the fault in an application for condonation of delay with an intent to achieve the dismissal thereof, but must adopt a liberal and justice oriented approach so that the justice may be imparted and the issue raised is decided on merit. It appears to us that the authority has taken a stricter view and without adverting to the explanation offered has proceeded on the basis of the ratio of law called out from the various judgment of the apex Court. The law has to be applied not in an adjunct manner, but in the perspective of the context, i.e., the facts involved therein as each fact cannot be equated with the other facts and, therefore, a pragmatic approach is required in relation to an application for condonation of delay. We, after looking into the explanation so offered and the fact that initially the petitioner approach this Court against the decision of the authority taken on the basis of the technicalities and the reasons which occasioned the delay, are satisfied that the petitioner was prevented by a sufficient cause in not filing the said Form within the statutory period provided therefor. We do not find any fetter on the part of the authority in condoning the delay as no outer cap is fixed in the statutory provision and, therefore, the authority ought to have condoned the delay instead of dismissing the Form on the anvil of limitation. The order impugned in this writ petition is hereby set aside. As a consequence whereof, the application for condonation of delay filed before the authority stands allowed - The authority is directed to consider the Form-10B u/s 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act on merit. Issues: Whether the authority erred in refusing to condone the delay in filing Form-10B under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.Analysis: The statutory power under Section 119(2)(b) permits condonation of delay where a satisfactory explanation establishing sufficient cause is furnished. The requirement is not strictly for a day-to-day chronology but for a coherent continuity of events which, when read meaningfully, constitutes a sufficient cause within the statutory ambit. Authorities should avoid a pedantic or mechanical approach; instead a liberal, justice-oriented and pragmatic assessment of the explanation is appropriate. The authority's strict insistence on a day-to-day account and dismissal on the sole ground of limitation, without applying the statutory test of sufficient cause to the continuity of events presented, renders the refusal unsustainable.Conclusion: The impugned order is set aside; the application for condonation of delay is allowed and the authority is directed to decide the Form-10B on merits in accordance with law within two months from communication of the order.