2023 (12) TMI 1038 - HC - Income Tax

Delay in filing the revised return of income u/s 139(5) - delay of 37 days in filing the revised returns - petitioner filed his return of income without claiming relief u/s 89 - petitioner is a Pilot - HELD THAT - There was a delay of 37 days in filing the revised returns. Initially, the petitioner had filed his Income Tax Returns within the prescribed time limit. However, he has not availed the benefits available u/s 89 of the Income Tax Act. Petitioner is a Pilot, who has been travelling throughout India. That apart, he is also a Trainer for the Pilots. Therefore, by oversight, he had filed his returns without claiming the exemption, which is available u/s 89 of the Income Tax Act and there is no dispute on the aspect that the petitioner's entitlement to claim the said exemption. In the present case, the petitioner should have filed the revised returns within the time limit prescribed under the provisions of the Income Tax Act. However, due to the nature of work, the petitioner was unable to file his revised returns in time. No doubt, the petitioner is a Pilot, who has to travel throughout India and also he is a trainer of Pilots. As a Pilot, he cannot be excepted to reach home in time everyday. He may be compelled to stay away from his home town. Further, in this writ petition, the petitioner is asking for condonation of delay of 37 days. Therefore, this Court feels that for the interest of justice, the said delay of 37 days in filing the revised returns has to be condoned, since it is not a tax liability that the petitioner is not going to pay to the respondent, but it is an exemption, which he is entitled to claim under the provisions of Income Tax Act. The said entitlement cannot be deprived by citing the reasons of delay of 37 days in filing the revised returns. Regarding the argument that Respondents that there must be some discipline in filing the returns, otherwise it would set an example to demoralise the work done by the Officers, who are in-charge of filing returns is concerned, this Court is of the considered view that the question of demoralisation of work will not come into picture here, since it is the duty of the Officers to scrutinize the returns and in the course of scrutinizing the returns, if anything is found, it is the duty of the Officers concerned to intimate the same to the Assessees and hence, while performing their duty. In fact, this Court expects that the officials should assist the Assessees and inform the defects in time, if any, noticed in the returns then and there. This Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order passed by the respondent. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the delay of 37 days in filing the revised returns is hereby condoned.

Summary

Issues:
The petition challenges an order to condone delay in filing a revised income tax return under Section 139(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2022-2023.

Details of Judgment:

Issue 1: Delay in Filing Revised Return
The petitioner, a Pilot, filed original returns on time but missed claiming relief under Section 89 of the Act. The delay in filing the revised return was due to the nature of his job, which involves regular travel and extended stays away from home. The respondent rejected the delay condonation citing lack of genuine hardship, but the court found the reasons valid. The court noted the petitioner's entitlement to the exemption and condoned the 37-day delay.

Issue 2: Genuine Hardship and Condonation of Delay
The Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents argued against condoning the delay, emphasizing the need for discipline in filing returns. However, the court found that the petitioner's circumstances, as a Pilot with travel obligations, warranted leniency. The court stressed that the delay did not involve tax liability but rather an entitlement under the Act, which should not be denied due to a minor delay.

Issue 3: Setting Aside the Impugned Order
The court set aside the respondent's order, highlighting the duty of officers to assist taxpayers and promptly address any issues in returns. The judgment emphasized the importance of ensuring that genuine hardships are considered when dealing with delay in filing returns. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, and the delay of 37 days in filing the revised returns was condoned, with no costs imposed.