9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 1209X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jecting the request of the Petitioner to condone the delay in filing the IT return for the Assessment year 2021-22 under Section 119(2)(b). 4. Mr. B. Panda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that for the assessment year 2021-22 when the petitioner submitted his return, the same was rejected on the ground of delay. According to him the return under the provisions of the statute could not be furnished because of delay made under various reasons which were beyond his control and unless the delay is condoned, the filing of return could not be made by the petitioner. As such, the petitioner was under treatment on account of his frequent illness and finally kept under the treatment of Dr. P.G. Satpathy, a Medicine Specialist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re paid to the credit of the IT Department and excess amount as per the statement prepared accrued the claim of refund at Rs.10,939/- and unless the return was entertained and delay is condoned considering the illness etc., it could not be possible to file IT Return in the relevant year. Therefore, when the petitioner submitted the IT return, the delay could have been condoned invoking Section 119 (2)(b) of the IT Act. The petitioner's transactions of the relevant yearwere in fact coming under the limit of Statutory Audit as per Section 44AB of the IT Act and unless the Auditor's Report is accompaniedin the IT return as prescribed, the filing of the return cannot be entertained. On the whole the deficiency in the return could not be complie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the orders passed by the apex Court as well as by this Court as mentioned above. Had the order of the apex Court been taken into consideration, the authority could not have been rejected the condonation of delay application of the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the order so passed by the Principal CIT, the opposite party no.2 dated 01.08.2023 under Annexure-1 cannot be sustained in the eye of law and the same is liable to be quashed and is hereby quashed. As a consequence thereof, the matter is remitted back to the Principal CIT-opposite party no.2 to consider the return submitted by the petitioner at belated stage and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. 7. With this observation and direction, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
