https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12780 The dominant issue was whether refusal to condone delay in a refund claim under s. 237, despite satisfaction of CBDT Circular F. No. 225/208/93-ITA-II, was lawful under s. 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act. The HC held that "genuine hardship" in s. 119(2)(b) must be construed liberally and, where the circular's conditions were undisputedly met and the delay was satisfactorily explained, the authority ought to admit the claim and examine it on merits rather than reject it on a technical ground. Consequently, the CBDT order rejecting condonation/refund was quashed; however, no mandamus for immediate refund was issued since the claim had not been adjudicated on merits, and the claimant waived interest. en-us Wed, 10 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jan 2026 17:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12780 The dominant issue was whether refusal to condone delay in a refund claim under s. 237, despite satisfaction of CBDT Circular F. No. 225/208/93-ITA-II, was lawful under s. 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act. The HC held that "genuine hardship" in s. 119(2)(b) must be construed liberally and, where the circular's conditions were undisputedly met and the delay was satisfactorily explained, the authority ought to admit the claim and examine it on merits rather than reject it on a technical ground. Consequently, the CBDT order rejecting condonation/refund was quashed; however, no mandamus for immediate refund was issued since the claim had not been adjudicated on merits, and the claimant waived interest. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12780