TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 517
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the order dated 26.05.2017 passed under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(herein after referred to as 'IT Act') by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Thiruvananthapuram, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 119(2)(b) of the IT Act has been rejected 3. The petitioner filed return of the income for the assessment year 2012-13 on 19.08.2015, showing 'nil' total income. The due date for filing the return was 31.07.2012. When the return was filed beyond the prescribed time limit, the same was processed under Section 139 of the IT Act. 4. Circular No. 9/2015 dated 09.06.2015 prescribes the conditions for condonation of delay in processing the claim for refund by an assessee. The said circular has been place....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of delay on merit has considered the whole case on merit, and rejected the claim without condoning the delay. He, therefore, submits that this approach of the Commissioner of Income Tax rejecting the claim of the petitioner without touching on the merit of the application for condonation of delay, is incorrect and not as per the provisions of the Act or the circular mentioned above. He further submits that in view thereof, the writ petition may be allowed and the matter may be remitted to the Commissioner of IT or deciding the application for condonation of delay a fresh. 7. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Pala Marketing Co-operative Society ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ular No. 9/2015 mentioned above specifically provides that the authority is required to show that the income/loss declared and/or refund claimed is correct and genuine and also that the case is of genuine hardship on merits. Therefore, the Income Tax authority which is empowered to condone the delay in filing the application for refund is to ensure itself that the claim of the assessee is genuine and bonafide. Therefore, I find not much substance in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the commissioner was not required to enter into the merit of the claim of the petitioner and he should have confined himself to the genuine hardship of the petitioner while considering the application for condoning the delay in filing the....