Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The HC set aside the CBDT's order refusing condonation of a 3 years, 10 months and 23 days delay in filing a revised return by the Petitioner-Trust, holding that the delay arose from a bona fide belief that a second rectification application remained pending. Applying a justice-oriented approach to exercise under s.119(2)(b) of the IT Act rather than a pedantic one, the court found the delay was not deliberate, negligent or tainted by mala fides and that refusal to condone would cause grave hardship to the Petitioner. Consequently, the HC directed that the 4th Respondent ought to have condoned the delay and the impugned refusal is set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.