9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 69X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent No. 2 in rejecting the application seeking permission for condonation of delay and permit to file income tax return for the A.Y. 2020-21, the due date for which had expired on 31.05.2021. 3. The delay in filing the income tax return was 26 days as the application under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 was filed on 26.06.2021. The order impugned rejecting the application under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 contains two grounds of rejection. The first is pertaining to genuineness and genuine hardship claimed by the petitioner in submitting return with the delay of 26 days. One of the reasons given by the petitioner in response to the show-cause notice and as also in the application seeking for condonation o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which it had failed to do so. 6. On the further contention of the petitioner in the application seeking condonation of delay in submitting the return that the hospital premises was declared a dedicated Covid facility in Valsad, catering majority of population, and due to overwhelming situation, the delay had occurred beyond the control of the petitioner, it is stated in the order impugned that the contention of the applicant that accounts for the year A.Y. 2020-21 could not be finalized in time as accounts staff and Director were pre-occupied with treatment of Covid patients, was contradictory and did not hold any ground, inasmuch as, permission to treat covid patients was granted on 20.07.2020, i.e. three and more than ½ month aft ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eking for refund of TDS and concluded that the applicant has failed to establish the correctness and genuineness of income and refund claim for A.Y. 2020-21 as well. Thus, it seems to us that while rejecting the application seeking for condonation of delay, the respondent No. 2 has also proceeded to examine the correctness of the claim made by the petitioner to state that the application can be rejected. 10. Based on the decisions of this Court in Shailesh Vitthalbhai Patel vs. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax, reported in [2022] 145 taxmann.com 10 (Gujarat), it is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the reason given in the order impugned for rejection of the explanation on the ground of lack of genuine hardship that sinc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the relevant facts and reasons which may have been advanced for condoning the delay. The object is to help the assessee who for good and valid reasons are prevented from moving an application for any purpose within the time stipulated under the Act. In other words, it is observed that the applications which have witnessed delay for several meritorious reasons, should be considered purposely. It was further noted that the merits of the case of the assessee could be simultaneously considered by the authority exercising powers under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, however, the dominant purpose to be achieved is to condone the delay and, therefore, it is the grounds offering explanation of the delay which should overweigh with the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the jurisdictional assessing officer to make necessary inquiries or scrutinize the case in accordance with the provisions of the Act to ascertain the correctness of the claim." 17. Clause (6) is also relevant to be noted hereinunder : - "6. A belated application for supplementary claim of refund (claim of additional amount of refund after completion of assessment for the same year) can be admitted for condonation provided other conditions as referred above are fulfilled. The powers of acceptance / rejection within the monetary limits delegated to the Pr.CcsIT/CcsIT/Pr.CsIT/CsIT in case of returns claiming refund and supplementary claim of refund would be subject to the following conditions: i. The income of the assessee is not assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tting the return that no genuine hardship can be said to have been caused to the petitioner is a result of is an arbitrary approach of respondent No. 2. As noted above, the delay was merely 26 days and judicial notice can be taken to the fact that the country was facing overwhelming situation of second wave of Covid-19, which turned out to be fatal between the last week of March, 2021 till June, 2021, the entire set up of the whole country was paralyzed. Hospitals were flooded with patients and lot of death had occurred during the said period. The petitioner being a hospital establishment, having been declared a dedicated Covid facility by the District Administration, demonstrably was dealing with unprecedented adverse circumstances. The cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
