TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 234
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, CCIT, Delhi-4 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commissioner'), whereby the petitioner's application under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1961') has been rejected. 2. The facts germane for the present case are that with a view to avail benefits of Section 115BAA of the Act of 1961, as per the amended provision the petitioner was required to file Form 10-IC by the due date of filing of return of income. For the Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21, the petitioner filed its return of income on 03.02.2021, however, could/did not file the prescribed Form 10-IC in time for some reasons. 3. Since the petitioner did not file the requisite Form by the due date....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....10-IC on Income Tax Portal, has been submitted by the applicant. The contention of the applicant that one of its directors was in isolation as per health protocols during the relevant period for filing Form 10-IC does not justify the prolonged non-compliance. The company had another director also. Moreover, the company had the option to seek professional help to facilitate the filing process, It is also pertinent to note that the Income Tax Return itself was duly filed within time which indicates that the company's compliance functions were operational during the period in question. Therefore, the claim that isolation of one director prevented the filing of Form 10-IC is not supported by the facts and cannot be considered a reasonable c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....izens and were infected with COVID-19 virus, they could not furnish Form 10-IC in time and contended that the reasons given in the application were genuine and bona fide for which, petitioner's application under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act of 1961 ought to have been allowed. 9. Learned counsel relied upon a recent judgment dated 09.04.2026 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 2625/2026 titled Vrg Electronics Pvt Ltd v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Delhi 7 & Anr. and prayed that in light of the said judgment the writ petition be allowed. 10. Mr. Gaurav Gupta, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent on the other hand submitted that as per the Circular dated 18.11.2024 particularly para no. 5 and 6 thereof, the petitioner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on or after the date of issue of this Circular. A condonation application should be disposed of, as far as possible, within six months from the end of the month in which such application is received by the Competent Authority. 6. The delegation of powers, as per para 3 of this Circular shall cover all such applications for condonation of delay under section 119(2)(b) of the Act which are pending as on date of issue of this Circular." 14. On going through the Circular, we asked a question to Mr. Gaurav Gupta, that when the outer limit for filing the application was three years and the Circular was made applicable for AY 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23, then how could a Circular issued on 18.11.2024, be made applicable for AY 2020-21, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion which emanates from a combined reading of all the Circulars is, that an assessee is/was required to apply for condonation of delay within three years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year or in other words latest by 31.03.2024 so far as Assessment Year 2020-21 is concerned. 19. Petitioner has woken up from its slumber after more than four years and almost 5 years from the end of relevant financial year. 20. True it is that the beneficial Circular should be interpreted liberally, but this principle of interpretation is required to be applied carefully. Once a subject falls within the Circular, full play should be given to it but if an assessee fails to fall within the ambit of the Circular, an interpretation which is beyond....