2014 (11) TMI 18 - HC - Income Tax

Rejection of application of claim of exemption u/s 10(23C)(vii) Delay in filing application beyond stipulated date of 30th September 2013 Held that - There is no basis or foundation in the submission that the delay in filing the application for an exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) of the Act beyond the statutory date of 30 September 2013 should have been condoned assessee has already filed an application u/s 10(23C)(vi), though for AY 2014-15 thus, the order of the Principal Chief Commissioner does not suffer from any error Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Application under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 filed beyond the stipulated date.
- Condonation of delay in filing the application.
- Power of Chief Commissioner to condone delay under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act.
- Interpretation of relevant proviso in Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act.
- Application of Limitation Act in fiscal legislation.
- Precedent from Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise v. Hongo India Private Limited.
- Comparison with decision of Orissa High Court in Padmashree Krutarth Acharya Institute of Engineering and Technology v. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed an application under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2013-14 after the stipulated date of 30 September 2013. The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur rejected the application on the ground of being filed beyond the deadline. The petitioner sought condonation of the delay, arguing that the power to condone delay should be available to the Chief Commissioner under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act, previously vested in the Central Board of Direct Taxes. However, the Court noted that the Chief Commissioner is not a Court under the Limitation Act, and the legislative intent behind the relevant proviso in Section 10(23C)(vi) mandates timely applications for exemption.

The Court referred to the decision in Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise v. Hongo India Private Limited to emphasize that the time limits prescribed by special laws like the Income Tax Act are absolute and unextendable, and the provisions of the Limitation Act cannot be invoked to extend deadlines. The Court dismissed the argument for condonation of delay based on this principle. Additionally, the Court distinguished the decision of the Orissa High Court in Padmashree Krutarth Acharya Institute of Engineering and Technology, which directed consideration of condonation of delay by the Commissioner, not the Chief Commissioner, thereby not supporting the petitioner's case.

Ultimately, the Court concluded that the impugned order of the Principal Chief Commissioner was without error, leading to the dismissal of the petition with no costs awarded. The judgment highlights the importance of adhering to statutory timelines for applications under the Income Tax Act and the limitations on condoning delays in such cases, as established by relevant legal precedents.