2026 (8) TMI 891

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t, 1961, whereby the Petitioner's Application for condonation of delay in filing a corrected Return of Income under Section 139 (9) of the Act came to be rejected. 3. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record. 4. By Reply dated 22nd February 2024, the Department has opposed the Petition by contending that the Petitioner failed to establish the existence of any genuine hardship warranting exercise of powers under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. It is further submitted that, upon noticing a defect in the Return, a Notice under Section 139(9) of the Act was issued granting the Petitioner an opportunity of fifteen days to rectify the defect. Despite this opportunity, the Petitioner faile....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....consistently filed its Returns within time. The description of the name of the Firm has not remained uniform over the years. In some years, the Returns were filed as "S. P. International", while in other years, they were filed as "M/s. S. P. International". A detailed chart demonstrating the Returns filed over the years was submitted by the Petitioner along with its letter dated 24th September 2021 in support of the Application for condonation of delay. 9. The Department has also not disputed the fact that original Return for the relevant Assessment Year was filed within the prescribed time. Its principal objection is that the Petitioner failed to establish that the electronic portal was inaccessible or that there existed any technical i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....atively and that the Petitioner would have to seek appropriate relief before this Court. Having exhausted the available remedies, the Petitioner has rightly invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court. 14. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that sufficient cause existed for condoning the delay. The explanation furnished by the Petitioner cannot be said to be lacking in bona fides. The omission sought to be corrected was purely clerical in nature and did not affect the assessment of income in any manner. We are therefore unable to sustain the impugned Order, and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside. 15. Accordingly, the impugned Order dated 21st October 2021 passed by Respondent No. 1, u....