Petition for 216-day delay in filing ITR rejected due to insufficient grounds despite COVID-19 claims

The Madras HC rejected a petition seeking condonation of 216 days delay in filing ITR. The petitioner cited delayed audit report receipt and COVID-19 outbreak as reasons. The court found the audit certificate was issued on 02.07.2019 with all required documents, making it available seven months before COVID-19 outbreak in March 2020. The court held neither reason constituted genuine hardship since the petitioner could have filed ITR well before the pandemic. The HC refused to condone the delay, stating it would encourage revenue-related misdeeds and upheld the respondent's rejection of the application.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the delay of 216 days in filing the Income Tax Returns (ITR) by the petitioner can be condoned under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Whether the reasons provided by the petitioner for the delay, namely the late receipt of the audit report and the COVID outbreak, constitute genuine hardships.
3. The applicability and implications of Sections 80P, 80AC, and 234F of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in the context of the petitioner's case.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Condonation of Delay in Filing ITR
The central issue is the rejection of the petitioner's application under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, seeking condonation of a 216-day delay in filing their ITR for the assessment year 2019-2020. The petitioner, a Co-operative Society, was required to file its ITR by 31.10.2019 under Section 139(1) of the IT Act. The petitioner filed the ITR on 03.06.2020, attributing the delay to the late receipt of the audit report and the COVID outbreak. The court noted that the audit was completed on 02.07.2019, well before the due date, and the delay was not justified by the reasons provided.

Issue 2: Reasons for Delay - Audit Report and COVID Outbreak
The petitioner claimed the delay was due to the late receipt of the audit report and the COVID outbreak. However, the court found that the audit report was completed and made available on 02.07.2019, and the petitioner had ample time to file the ITR before the COVID outbreak in March 2020. The court concluded that the reasons provided did not constitute genuine hardships, as the delay was primarily due to the petitioner's inaction.

Issue 3: Applicability of Sections 80P, 80AC, and 234F
The petitioner sought to claim deductions under Section 80P of the IT Act, which are contingent upon timely filing of the ITR as per Section 80AC. The court emphasized that under Section 80AC, no deductions are allowed unless the ITR is filed by the due date. The court also referenced Section 234F, which allows for filing of ITR with a penalty after the due date. The petitioner had already filed the ITR with a penalty, and thus, the application for condonation of delay was deemed unnecessary and an attempt to gain deductions post-facto.

The court highlighted that condoning such delays without genuine hardships would set a bad precedent, undermining the purpose of Section 80AC and encouraging similar applications. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition, affirming the respondent's decision to reject the condonation application, and concluded that no interference was warranted with the impugned order dated 27.12.2023.

---