9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 595X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lysis of justice. High Court in its order [ 2022 (12) TMI 1019 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] , condoned the delay by observing that the Income Tax Authority should consider the claim for deduction u/s 80IB (10) of the Act for AY 2011-12 made by Petitioner in accordance with law, as if there was no delay in filing the return - By an order pronounced [ 2023 (7) TMI 1405 - ITAT PUNE] the Tribunal rejected the MA by observing that the High Court states the Income Tax Authority and the ITAT is not an authority and there was no apparent mistake in its order as required within the four corners of Section 254 (2) of the Act. It is this order, which is impugned in this Petition HELD THAT:- Though we would agree with the view expressed by the ITAT that in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emise Private Limited, for whatever reason had not filed its return of income ("ROI") for Assessment Year 2011-12. Therefore, an assessment order dated 14th March 2024 came to be passed. Petitioner was not given a deduction under Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") because of filing belated ROI. Petitioner's appeal came to be dismissed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] vide an order dated 31st March 2017 on the same ground that Petitioner did not file the ROI on time. Petitioner challenged that order of the CIT (A) by filing an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("ITAT"). During the pendency of the appeal, Petitioner also filed an application under Section 119 (2) (b) of the Act before the Ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 days later on 30th September, 2012. That in respect of the other years from 2010-11 to 2013-14 except 2011-12, the income tax authorities have allowed the deduction under Section 80IB (10) through the petitioner. In our view, substantial injustice would be caused to the petitioner if the order dated 7th May, 2021 is not set aside. This is clearly a case falling within the phrase "genuine hardship". As mentioned above. Technical consideration above cannot come in the way of substantial justice. It is neither an allegation of mala fide nor an allegation that the delay has been deliberate. We do not find that the omission to file petitioner's return by the income tax consultant to be an act of negligence. Any person in his situation would ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... required within the four corners of Section 254 (2) of the Act. It is this order, which is impugned in this Petition. 3. Though we would agree with the view expressed by the ITAT that in the order dated 4th May 2022 there was no error, the ITAT failed to appreciate the spirit in which the order dated 23rd August 2022 was passed by the Hon'ble High Court. The High Court had very categorically observed that the authority should refrain from over analysis which leads to paralysis of justice. Therefore, the delay having been condoned by the High Court, we hereby quash and set aside the assessment order dated 14th March 2014 and remand the matter to the stage of the Assessing Officer ("AO"), who shall pass fresh assessment order in accordance w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
