TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (2) TMI 656
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2015 - 16. The petitioner's contention is that the petitioner is an advocate practicing before this Court and is a regular income tax payee. The subject matter of the present writ petition relates to the Assessment Year 2015 - 16 and at the relevant point of time, the petitioner was serving as a Deputy Government Advocate for pleading cases of Government before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore.. The petitioner filed his return of income on 02.12.2015 for the assessment year 2015 - 16 declaring the income from the salary received from the State of Madhya Pradesh as well as income from other sources. The due date for filing the return for the year under consideration was 07.09....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ut there was a technical default of not sending the acknowledgment to CPC, Banglore within 120 days from the date of filing of such return. The petitioner has further stated that to meet the situation, the petitioner has submitted an application under Section 119 (2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 before the Commissioner of Income Tax - I on 07.11.2017 and categorically stated that he is 76 years of age and on account of illness of his wife, he was not able to send the acknowledgment to CPC within the stipulated time. It was also brought to the notice of the Commissioner that an amount of Rs. 43,586/- has been deducted as TDS from the income received as salary by the petitioner and he is entitled for refund. The petitioner has filed file....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the facts and circumstances of the case. (D) To award the cost of this petition in favour of the petitioner. A reply has been filed by the Income Tax Department and they have admitted in the return that the Commissioner does have the power to condone the delay, however, in the present case, as reflected from order dated 15.03.2019, the petitioner could not prove any circumstances showing genuine hardship in his case and accordingly, the application for condonation of delay was rejected. The respondent has further stated that the scheme does provide for condonation of delay and the same is not automatic, however, there has to be a genuine and valid reason for condonation of delay. This Court has carefully gone through the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s not forwarded to the CPC, Banglore in the prescribed time. The return for assessment year 2015 - 16 was filed on 02.12.2015 and Form No.V was received by the CPC, Banglore on 01.03.2017. Reasonable cause was explained in the application submitted by the petitioner and the Principal Commissioner has brushed aside the factum of illness of the wife of the petitioner by stating that after discharge from the hospital, the assessee's wife has taken routine treatment and the assessee was not prevented from the filing the return up to March, 2017 under Section 139 (4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The present case is certainly a case of genuine hardship to the assessee and the discretion should have been exercised in favour of the assess....