2026 (8) TMI 1275

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1962 (for short, "IT Rules") for claiming exemption from payment of income tax under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, "IT Act") for the Assessment Year 2021-22 by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyderabad ("CIT", abbreviated), the Petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner submitted that despite sufficient cause being shown, Opposite Party No.1 has rejected the application for condonation of delay of 18 days respectively in filing the audit report. It is submitted that the delay was caused due to Covid-19 Pandemic, which was not appreciated by the said authority. 2.1. L....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ption), (2021)18 ITR-OL 253 (Guj) and contended that the provision relating furnishing of audit report with the return is to be treated as procedural and the same could be filed even before the assessment. 3. Mr. Avinash Kedia, learned Junior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department submitted that the CIT exercising his discretion under Section 119(2)(b) of the IT Act rejected the application for condonation of delay having found no sufficient cause shown by the Petitioner. He submitted that genuine hardship being not demonstrated by the Petitioner, the rejection of petition for condonation of delay is not unjustified. 4. Heard learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner and learned Junior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Depar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....posed of vide judgment dated 25.04.2025. 5.3. Considering the facts and situation of the said case and applying the legal position discussed in similar fact-situation as obtained in Action Research for Health and Socioeconomic Development (supra), this Court is of the opinion that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyderabad has not applied his conscientious mind in proper perspective. Taking cognizance of well-established principle that when technical consideration and cause of substantial justice are pitted against each other, it is the substantial justice which is to prevail, this Court holds that mere technicality should not have been ground for claim of exemption under Section 12A of the IT Act. Thus, the CIT has failed to ....