Non-resident individual gets relief for delayed income tax return e-verification under section 139(4) due to unavailability

Gujarat HC allowed petition by non-resident individual seeking condonation of delay for e-verification of income tax return. Petitioner was unavailable in India from June 2020 to August 2022, causing delay in filing return under section 139(4). Court found genuine hardship and sufficient cause for delay, noting technical glitches are difficult to prove. Revenue's order under section 119(2)(b) refusing condonation was quashed. Court directed revenue to reconsider application on merits within 12 weeks, finding undue hardship undisputed.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to rejection of application for condonation of delay for e-verification of income tax return.

Analysis:
The High Court heard a petition challenging the rejection of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India related to the condonation of delay for e-verification of the income tax return for the Assessment Year 2022-23. The petitioner, an individual assessee, had filed her return of income claiming a deduction under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner sold a residential house, resulting in capital gains, and acquired another residential house within the prescribed time limit. However, due to technical glitches, she could not e-verify the return within 30 days. The petitioner, a non-resident individual residing in New Zealand, filed a belated return and sought condonation of delay under Section 119 (2) (b) of the Act.

The petitioner contended that the rejection of the application was unjust and illegal. The delay was due to genuine reasons, including her age, non-availability in India, and technical issues. The claim for refund was supported by documents and submissions. The petitioner had sent a signed copy of ITR-V to the authorities as well. The petitioner's counsel argued that failure to condone the delay would cause genuine hardship. The respondent, opposing the petition, argued that the petitioner had sufficient time to e-verify the return and that there was no error in rejecting the application.

After considering the submissions, the Court found that the petitioner's non-resident status and unavailability in India were established facts. The Court noted that the respondent's contention of lack of evidence for technical glitches was not a valid ground, as proving technical glitches can be difficult. The Court concluded that there was genuine hardship faced by the petitioner and sufficient cause for condonation of delay. Therefore, the Court quashed and set aside the order rejecting the application under Section 119 (2) (b) of the Act and directed the respondent to reconsider the application on merits within 12 weeks.

In conclusion, the High Court partially allowed the petition, quashing the rejection order and directing a reevaluation of the application for condonation of delay in e-verifying the income tax return.

---