The Karnataka High Court on 15 October dismissed an appeal filed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes and other Revenue authorities against an order condoning a delay of 2 hours, 38 minutes and 26 seconds in filing the income tax return of Century Joint Developments Pvt. Ltd. for Assessment Year 2019-20.
A Bench of Justices S.G. Pandit and Justice Chillakur Sumalatha noted that a minimal delay in filing an income tax return, attributed to a technical glitch, did not justify a hyper-technical rejection of a request for condonation. The judges said:
“When the delay is very minimal of 2 Hours, 38 Minutes and 26 Seconds, the Assessing Officer ought not to have rejected the application for condonation of delay. The delay is not in days, months or years, it is only 2 Hours, 38 Minutes and 26 Seconds. There is no intention of the respondent assessee to avoid filing of return of income for the assessment year 2019-2020”.
The Revenue challenged a Single Judge's order dated 23 April 2024, which set aside the intimation dated 19 August 2020 and the order dated 5 March 2024 rejecting the company's application for condonation of delay.
It argued that the company was a habitual defaulter in filing income tax returns and had failed to file returns for three consecutive assessment years. It contended that the Assessing Officer had rightly rejected the application.
The Court referred to Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which empowers specified authorities to admit belated applications or claims for exemption, deduction, refund or other relief after examining the genuine hardship pleaded by the taxpayer.
The company attributed the delay to a technical glitch. The Bench noted that the Department could not provide any comments on the technical glitch encountered by the company. It observed that the delay was limited to a few hours and that the company had no intention of avoiding its filing obligation.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal and disposed of the pending interlocutory applications.
For Appellant: E.I. Sanmathi, Advocate