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...
The High Court held that the authority erred in rejecting the petitioner's application for condonation of one day's delay in filing the return of income u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act. The reasoning that the return had already been processed u/s 143(1) with a demand raised was flawed and showed non-application of mind. The delay of one day was bona fide due to technical issues and should have been condoned following the principles laid down in the case of Jyotsna Mehta. The Court opined that the paramount jurisprudential principles mandate condonation of such a short delay caused by genuine reasons.
The High Court held that the authority erred in rejecting the petitioner's application for condonation of one day's delay in filing the return of income u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act. The reasoning that the return had already been processed u/s 143(1) with a demand raised was flawed and showed non-application of mind. The delay of one day was bona fide due to technical issues and should have been condoned following the principles laid down in the case of Jyotsna Mehta. The Court opined that the paramount jurisprudential principles mandate condonation of such a short delay caused by genuine reasons.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
