9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 1213X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the application / request for condonation of the delay without appreciating that returns had already been processed and as such, the delay in submitting the returns has stood condoned by the respondents HELD THAT:- As rightly contended by petitioner, despite noticing that the returns of the petitioner had already been processed and intimated to the petitioner on 09.05.2020 itself, the respondent No.1 clearly fell in error in rejecting the application for condonation of delay vide impugned order dated 28.07.2020, which is clearly unreasoned, non-speaking, laconic and cryptic order without any application of mind and without assigning valid or cogent reasons as to why application for condonation of delay, which had already stood condone ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. The material on record discloses that the petitioner submitted his Income tax returns on 25.10.2018 and on 18.03.2020, request / application for condonation of delay under Section 119 (2) (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the IT Act ) was filed intimating respondent No.1 that the delay in submitting the returns was on account of him being illiterate and due to the intervening marriage of his daughter and as such, it was not possible for him to submit the returns within the stipulated period. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite the returns submitted by the petitioner having been processed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the processing of the returns was liable to be rejected. 7. At any rate, the reasoning contained in the impugned order for the purpose of rejecting the application for condonation of delay are without any application of mind and on this ground also, the impugned order dated 28.07.2020 deserves to be set aside and request / application for condonation of delay submitted by the petitioner deserves to be accepted. 8. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order at Annexure L dated 28.07.2020 passed by respondent No.1, is hereby set aside. (iii) Respondents are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for refund of TDS paid by him in accordance with law within ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
