Condonation of delay in Form 10-IC was refused as CBDT circulars imposed a three-year outer limit.

Delay in filing Form 10-IC under Section 119(2)(b) was examined against CBDT circulars meant to relieve genuine hardship. The Court accepted that a COVID-19-related explanation supported by medical material should not be rejected hyper-technically, but it also held that the circulars fixed an outer limit of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year for such condonation requests. On that construction, an application for Assessment Year 2020-21 had to be made by 31.03.2024, and a later request could not be entertained. The rejection of the condonation application was therefore upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to condonation of delay in filing Form 10-IC under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2020-21, and whether the CBDT circulars governing such condonation permitted the delayed application.

Analysis: The petitioner sought relief on the basis of genuine hardship arising from COVID-19 infection of its directors and the beneficial nature of the CBDT circular. The Court held that the explanation for delay could not be rejected in a hyper-technical manner when supporting medical material was placed on record and the circular was intended to mitigate hardship. At the same time, the Court construed the circulars as imposing an outer limit of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year for filing such condonation applications. Reading the circulars together, the Court found that for Assessment Year 2020-21 the application had to be made by 31.03.2024, whereas the petitioner approached the authority much later. The benefit of a liberal interpretation could not extend beyond the clear wording of the circular.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to condonation of delay, and the rejection of the application under Section 119(2)(b) was upheld.

---