2009 (3) TMI 59 - HC - Income Tax

Application for condonation of delay in filing the return of income petitioner challenging the order of respondent-authority rejecting the application - contention of assessee that the impugned order does not contain any reasons, does not merit acceptance because the order categorically states that the reasons offered by the assessee for delay, have not been found fit to warrant condonation of delay respondent-authority is right in rejecting Condonnation application petition is dismissed

Summary

Issues:
Challenging the legality of rejecting the application for condonation of delay in filing the return of income for Assessment Year 1983-84 under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The petitioner, an individual with income from family business partnerships and proprietary concerns, challenged the rejection of the application seeking condonation of delay in filing the return of income for Assessment Year 1983-84. The petitioner's contention was that various letters were issued to retrieve necessary documents for filing returns, and the delay was due to the retention of account books by the Department. The petitioner admitted filing returns for other assessment years belatedly. The respondent argued that the return was filed without sufficient cause and the delay was not justified. The Court noted that returns for preceding and succeeding years were also filed late, and penalties were imposed for belated filing in those years.

The return for Assessment Year 1983-84 was due on 30.06.1983 but filed on 13.11.1986, significantly delayed. The Court observed that all returns were filed late, and for the subsequent year 1984-85, the return was filed before the one in question. The Court upheld the rejection of the condonation application, stating that the order had valid reasons for not granting the delay condonation. The Court emphasized that if the authority did not find genuine hardship, the order cannot be deemed legally flawed. The petitioner's argument that the order lacked reasoning was dismissed, as the order clearly stated the reasons for denying the condonation. Consequently, the petition challenging the rejection was rejected, with no costs imposed.

In conclusion, the Court upheld the rejection of the condonation application for the delay in filing the return of income for Assessment Year 1983-84, emphasizing that the order contained valid reasons for the decision. The petitioner's delay in filing returns for multiple assessment years, coupled with penalties imposed in previous years, led to the dismissal of the petition challenging the rejection.