9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 292X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpugned orders are quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the respondent to pass appropriate order to condone the delay in filing the Form 10B for AY 2018-2019 by the petitioner. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA Appearance: For the Petitioner(s) No. 1: Mr SN Divatia (1378). For the Respondent(s) No. 1 : Ms Maithili D Mehta (3206). ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA) 1. Heard learned advocate Mr. S.N. Divatia for the petitioner and learned advocate Ms. Maithili D. Mehta for the respondent. 2. Having regard to the issue involved in this petition which is in a very narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for hearing. 3. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Ms. Maithili Mehta waives services of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent. 4. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 21.12.2021 passed under section 11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y CPC Bengaluru for the reason of failure to file Form No.10B for A.Y.2018-2019 within the due date stipulated under the Act. 11. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had filed Form 10B on 30.10.2018 after filing the ITR on 30.09.2018. Therefore, the petitioner made application on 27.09.2021 for condonation of delay for 34 days in e-filing of Form 10B which was rejected by the respondent vide order dated 21.12.2021 on the ground that the petitioner had failed to furnish reply in response to the letters dated 5.10.2021 and 12.11.2021 asking to furnish specific reasons of the delay. 12. The petitioner thereafter made a re-request to condone the delay vide letter dated 27.12.2021 to the respondent but the said re-request was rejected by the respondent vide communication dated 31.12.2021 on the ground that the period of delay of 34 days was a long time and a reminder letter dated 12.11.2021 was issued which was not responded. 13. In the meanwhile, the respondent issued notice on 04.07.2022 proposing to amend the order passed under section 154 on 31.12.2020 and 19.05.2022 on account of the mistakes as detailed in the said notice. 14. In response to the said notice under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of a small town at Sami, wherein it is difficult to get expert advice. It was pointed out that professional preparing the audit report in Form 10B and preparing computation of income tax returns were at different places resulting into communication gap and the return was filed earlier to the filing of Form 10B. 23. Learned advocate Mr. Divatia submitted that the respondent has already condoned the delay in filing Form 10B for AYs 2013-2014, 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 and considering the same it ought to have condoned the delay of 34 days caused in filing Form 10B for AY 2018-2019 also so that the petitioner can avail the exemption under sections 11 and 12 of the Act. 24. In support of his submissions, reliance was placed on the decision of this Court in case of Social Security Scheme of GICEA v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) reported in (2023) 147 taxmann.com 283 (Gujarat) wherein in similar facts it was held as under: 5. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties and having gone through the material on record, the only question which falls for consideration is whether respondent committed an error in passing the order by not condoning the delay in filing Form ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t type should be equitious, balancing and judicious. Technically, strictly and liberally speaking, the respondent No. 2 might be justified in denying exemption u/s 12 of the Act by rejecting such condonation application, but an assessee a public charitable trust passed 30 years who substantially satisfies the condition for availing such exemption should not be denied the same merely on the bar of limitation especially when the legislature has conferred discretionary powers to condone such delay on the authorities concerned. 26. Learned advocate Mr. Divatia submitted that expression genuine hardship contained in section 119 (2) (b) of the Act should be construed liberally, particularly, in the matter of entertaining applications seeking condonation of delay as held by this Court in case of Sitaldas Motwani v. DIT reported in 323 ITR 223 , wherein this Court held as under: The phrase genuine hardship used in s. 119 (2) (b) should have been construed liberally even when the petitioner has complied with all the conditions mentioned in Circular dt 12-10-1993. The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay to enable the authorities to do substantive justice to the parties by di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It was submitted that the petitioner is habitual in late filing of Form 10B in past and the respondent was considerate in condoning the delay for earlier assessment years 2013-2014, 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 but for the year under consideration, delay in filing Form 10B was not found to be reasonable and therefore, the impugned order is just and proper which requires no interference while exercising extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 30. It was submitted that in earlier years, delay was of short period of one day for AY 2013-2014, 11 days for AY 2016-2017 and 08 days for AY 2017-2018 whereas for the year under consideration i.e. AY 2018-2019, there is a delay of 34 days and the petitioner has failed to point out any genuine hardship for such delay. 31. It was further pointed out that inspite of giving an opportunity to explain the delay by the respondent, the petitioner has failed to furnish reply in response to letter dated 12.11.2021 issued by the respondent and therefore, the respondent has no option but to presume that the petitioner has no reasonable caused for delay in filing Form 10B as well as the petitioner was not serious regarding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
