TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 624
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssed by Respondent No. 1 under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("I.T. Act") rejecting the Petitioner's application dated 24th September 2023 for condonation of delay in filing Form No. 10-IC for the Assessment Year 2020-2021. Respondent No. 1 has by the impugned order, refused to condone the delay of 11 days in filing Form No. 10-IC. Consequently, the Petitioner's claim for taxation at the lower rate of tax and exemption from the scheme of Minimum Alternate tax under Section 115JB of the I.T. Act have been denied to the Petitioner. This has resulted in a demand of Rs. 1,61,69,670 (including interest of Rs. 32,12,363) in an intimation under Section 143(1) of the I.T. Act dated 20th December 2021. 3. The Petitioner is a close....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Income-Tax Portal, but owing to technical difficulties, particularly that the option to select the Financial Year 2019-20 (relevant for the Assessment Year 2020-21) was not available, it was unable do so. However, the Petitioner saved a draft of the Form on the Portal on 25th March 2022. The Petitioner has downloaded an extract from the Portal of the Income-Tax department to clearly establish that the draft Form No. 10-IC was saved there on at 17:14 on 25th March 2022. The Petitioner points out that the said Form only contains a recital of the fact that it is availing of the option to be taxed in accordance with the provisions of Section 115BAA of the I.T. Act. 5. The Petitioner says that various Assessees faced the same predicament des....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Petitioner has not filed the form electronically and that the Petitioner had not made out a case of genuine hardship. Hence, the present Petition. 9. In this factual backdrop, Mr. Mistri, the learned Senior counsel for the Petitioner, points out that Respondent No. 1 has not doubted or denied any of the facts set out by the Petitioner. The Petitioner had filed Form No. 10-IC with a delay of 11 days. This delay was clearly due to the various factors mentioned in the Petition and was not intentional or deliberate but purely technical and inadvertent. Further the Petitioner had not obtained any advantage on account of the delay and there was neither any loss of revenue nor any attempt to evade tax. In fact, the Petitioner had clearly s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this regard Mr. Mistri relied upon the following judgments in support of the above proposition: i) V M Procon Pvt. Ltd. v Assistant Director of Income-tax [2024] 168 Taxmann.com 517 (Gujarat) ii) Axe BPO Services (P.) Ltd. v Director (ITA-1) (W.P. No. 3425 of 2024, dated 13-11-2024) (Madras) iii) MRF Ltd. v Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi [2025] 172 taxmann.com 776 (Madras) iv) Deeprock TMS (P.) Ltd. v Principal Commissioner of Income-tax [2023] 456 ITR 701 (Telangana) 12. Mr. Mistri finally points out that the impugned order is bereft of any valid reasoning and / or principle and in fact, there is not even a mention that the delay was caused because of any willful / intentional default on the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uction, refund or any other relief under this Act after the expiry of the period specified by or under this Act for making such application or claim and deal with the same on merits in accordance with law" 15. We are of the view that the said Section clearly empowers the CBDT (and the 1st Respondent by virtue of Circular No. 17 of 2024 dated 18th November 2024) to condone the delay in filing Form No. 10-IC. We are fortified in our view by the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of V M Procon Pvt. Ltd. v Assistant Director of Income-tax (supra) and in the case of the Madras High Court in the case of Axe BPO Services (P.) Ltd. v Director (ITA-1) (supra). 16. Further, we are of the opinion that the Petitioner has been subjecte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r any other writ order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records of the case leading to passing of the impugned order (Exhibit - T) dated 28th January 2025, and after going through the same and examining the question of legality thereof quash, cancel and set aside the impugned order (Exhibit - T) dated 28th January 2025; b) that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or a writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, ordering and directing the Respondents to: i. Withdraw the impugned order (Exhibit - T) dated 28th January, 2025; ii. Condone the delay in filing the....