the Kerala High Court held that section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act does not impose any limitation for the purpose of filing an application for delay.

The only bench in the Justice Gopinath P. pointed out that it is totally wrong on the part of the department to treat the date of filing of the application for condonation of delay as the relevant date for considering whether it was filed within 6 years or not.

The applicant/assessee has not filed his return for the assessment year 2010–11 within the time prescribed under section 139. The due date for filing the return for the assessment year 2010–2011 is 31 July 2010 , and the last date. he could file his return for that year on March 31, 2012. The applicant filed his return of income only on 13.7.2012.

The petitioner contended that the delay in filing the refund for the 2010-11 examination year was due to the applicant’s illness and hospitalization for about four months from February 25. 2012.

Since the return was not processed and the refund was not given for many years, the petitioner conducted an inquiry in June 2020 and filed a writ petition. The respondent required the applicant to file an application for adjournment of the delay under section 119(2)(b).

However, the record indicates that the petitioner has already filed an application for delay on 20.1.2021. Petitioner’s request was denied. It appears that the petition filed by the appellant was not within six years from the end of the relevant examination year.

The petitioner contended that even if the petition is more than six years old it is open to the High Court to exercise the jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution of India and condone the delay.

The department confirmed that the order is not subject to illegal, unjust, or inappropriate procedures that warrant interference in the exercise of authority under Article 226 of the Law foundation of India.

The court decided that the delay in filing the application for exemption, deduction, refund, or other relief after the expiration of the period for filing the application or claim and dealing with it on its merits by law it is one that can be taken. in the exercise of power.

Section 119(2)(b) states that the delay that should be granted is the delay in making the application.

The court set aside the order and remanded the matter to the department to reconsider the matter and decide whether the delay from 31.3.2012 (the last date by which the return could have been filed) the assessment year 2010–11) up to 13.7.2012. (date of filing of applicant’s return) is acceptable.

“I am of the view that if the adjournment from 1.4.2012 to 13.7.2012 (104 days) is granted and the petitioner is found eligible for refund, it will not bear interest u/s 244A of Income Tax Act, 1961, as it is clear that the petitioner (on his own appearance) did not pursue his claim for about eight years, it is found that he is eligible for the same.” said the court.

Case Title: KC Antony Versus Principal Commissioner

Citation: WP(C) No. 13511 in 2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 598

Date: 17.11.2022

Counsel for Petitioner: Advocate Anish Jose Antony, L. Venkatappa Counsel for

Author: Attorney Christopher Abraham

Click here to read the order

Source link