Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (8) TMI 517

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ation of delay in processing the claim for refund by an assessee. The powers of acceptance or rejection of the applications within the monetary limits, had been delegated to the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax - The aforesaid circular further provides that a belated application for supplementary claim of refund can be admitted for condonation provided other conditions as referred to above, are to be fulfilled. It is not in dispute that the circular issued by the CBDT are binding on the Income Tax authorities. Paragraph 5 of circular No. 9/2015 mentioned above specifically provides that the authority is required to show that the income/loss declared and/or refund claimed is correct and genuine and also that the case is of genui .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rred to as IT Act ) by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Thiruvananthapuram, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 119(2)(b) of the IT Act has been rejected 3. The petitioner filed return of the income for the assessment year 2012-13 on 19.08.2015, showing nil total income. The due date for filing the return was 31.07.2012. When the return was filed beyond the prescribed time limit, the same was processed under Section 139 of the IT Act. 4. Circular No. 9/2015 dated 09.06.2015 prescribes the conditions for condonation of delay in processing the claim for refund by an assessee. The said circular has been placed on record with the writ petition as Ext. P10. The powers of acceptance or rejection of the applicatio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... without condoning the delay. He, therefore, submits that this approach of the Commissioner of Income Tax rejecting the claim of the petitioner without touching on the merit of the application for condonation of delay, is incorrect and not as per the provisions of the Act or the circular mentioned above. He further submits that in view thereof, the writ petition may be allowed and the matter may be remitted to the Commissioner of IT or deciding the application for condonation of delay a fresh. 7. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Pala Marketing Co-operative Society Ltd.v. Union of India and others [2008(1) KHC 637]. 8. On the other hand, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s required to show that the income/loss declared and/or refund claimed is correct and genuine and also that the case is of genuine hardship on merits. Therefore, the Income Tax authority which is empowered to condone the delay in filing the application for refund is to ensure itself that the claim of the assessee is genuine and bonafide. Therefore, I find not much substance in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the commissioner was not required to enter into the merit of the claim of the petitioner and he should have confined himself to the genuine hardship of the petitioner while considering the application for condoning the delay in filing the application. So far as the judgment in the case of Pala Marketing Coopera .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... see if delay is not condoned. If delay in this case is not condoned, the cooperative society will be deprived of Rs. 10 lakhs and odd which it was otherwise not liable to pay by virtue of the exemption claimed under S. 80P of the Income Tax Act. In the circumstances, I quash Ext. P9 declaring petitioner's entitlement for condonation of delay under S. 119(2)(b) of the Act and consequently direct the 4th respondent to process petitioner's claim for refund under S. 237 and grant refund to the extent found eligible within a period of three months from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the petitioner. 10. Even otherwise when the circular itself provides that the claim of the assessee has to be considered and the au .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates