Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Section 119(2)(b) supports condonation where genuine hardship would otherwise result and substantial justice would be defeated by a procedural lapse. A timely original return, coupled with a bona fide correction confined to the partnership firm's nomenclature, did not alter income, tax liability, or substantive claims and caused no prejudice to the Revenue. The delay was therefore treated as arising from a purely clerical omission rather than a substantive default. Rejection of condonation was quashed, the corrected return was treated as validly filed, and it was directed to be processed in accordance with law without influence from the rejection order.
Section 119(2)(b) supports condonation where genuine hardship would otherwise result and substantial justice would be defeated by a procedural lapse. A timely original return, coupled with a bona fide correction confined to the partnership firm's nomenclature, did not alter income, tax liability, or substantive claims and caused no prejudice to the Revenue. The delay was therefore treated as arising from a purely clerical omission rather than a substantive default. Rejection of condonation was quashed, the corrected return was treated as validly filed, and it was directed to be processed in accordance with law without influence from the rejection order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.