https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784044 The dominant issue was whether rejection under s.119(2)(b) of the condonation application for an eight-minute delay in e-filing the return, resulting in denial of carry-forward of losses, was valid. The HC held that the audit report under s.44AB was uploaded within time and the taxpayer had logged into the portal before midnight; even assuming no portal glitch, an eight-minute delay was a sufficient cause when refusal would cause grave hardship by disallowing substantial carried-forward losses. The impugned rejection was set aside and the delay in filing the return for the relevant AY was condoned, restoring eligibility to claim carry-forward of losses. en-us Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Dec 2025 08:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784044 The dominant issue was whether rejection under s.119(2)(b) of the condonation application for an eight-minute delay in e-filing the return, resulting in denial of carry-forward of losses, was valid. The HC held that the audit report under s.44AB was uploaded within time and the taxpayer had logged into the portal before midnight; even assuming no portal glitch, an eight-minute delay was a sufficient cause when refusal would cause grave hardship by disallowing substantial carried-forward losses. The impugned rejection was set aside and the delay in filing the return for the relevant AY was condoned, restoring eligibility to claim carry-forward of losses. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784044