https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775626 The HC held that the petitioner was not responsible for errors in the Form 3CD dates, which were caused by the Chartered Accountant. The delay in filing the revised return was due to correcting these mistakes, necessary to claim a refund under Section 43B. The PCIT erred in rejecting the condonation application solely based on Circular No. 9/2015 without considering the facts. The court quashed the impugned order and directed the respondent to reconsider the condonation of delay and pass a fresh order within twelve weeks, enabling the petitioner to claim the refund and avoid disallowance under Section 36(1)(va). en-us Tue, 08 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Mar 2026 12:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775626 The HC held that the petitioner was not responsible for errors in the Form 3CD dates, which were caused by the Chartered Accountant. The delay in filing the revised return was due to correcting these mistakes, necessary to claim a refund under Section 43B. The PCIT erred in rejecting the condonation application solely based on Circular No. 9/2015 without considering the facts. The court quashed the impugned order and directed the respondent to reconsider the condonation of delay and pass a fresh order within twelve weeks, enabling the petitioner to claim the refund and avoid disallowance under Section 36(1)(va). Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 08 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775626