Wp/11531/2024 Of Mr. Sarath Madayil v. The Commissioner Of Income-Tax

Digitally signed byLEELAVATHI S RLocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25 DAY OF APRIL, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR -WRIT PETITION NO. 11531 OF 2024 (TIT) BETWEEN: MR. SARATH MADAYIL, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, PRESENTLY A CITIZEN OF CANADA R/AT 5214 THORNBURN DR. BURLINGTON, ONTARIO CANADA L7L6R4. AND ALSO AT 7-4-256/1, NAVAJEEVAN NAGAR, TIRUMALAGIRI, HYDERABAD - 500 011. REP. HEREIN BY HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, MR. GOVINDARAJU S/O LATE MR. VENKATESHWAR AGED 67 YEARS, NO. 7811, MOSQUE ROAD CROSS FRAZER TOWN, BANGALORE - 560 005. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. BHAVANA B., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SANDEEP HUILGOL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), BENGALURU BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 095. (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), BENGALURU BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 095. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(2), BENGALURU, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 095. 3. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-3, BENGALURU, INCOME-TAX-3, BENGALURU, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 095. KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 095. 4. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI -110 002. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI -110 002. REP. HEREIN BY ITS CHAIRPERSON. 5. THE CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, BENGALURU - 560 500. INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT, BENGALURU - 560 500. (BY SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI, ADVOCATE) …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15/02/2024 BEARING DIN AND ORDER NO. ITBA/COM/F/17/2023-24/1060999985(1) PASSED BY THE R1 UNDER SECTION 119(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2022-23 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned order at Annexure-A dated 15.02.2024, whereby respondent No.1 rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, refusing to condone the delay in filing income tax returns for the Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the writ petition papers. 3. A perusal of the material on record would indicate that before respondent No.1 as well as before this Court, it is the specific contention of the petitioner that he could not file his income tax returns within a due date due to bonafide reasons, which were beyond his control and due to inadvertence, lack of professional guidance, logistical and technical difficulties which constituted genuine hardship within the meaning of Circular dated 09.06.2015. It is further contended that delay in filing income tax returns may be condoned and same may be accepted by the respondents. WP No. 11531 of 2024 4. A perusal of the impugned order would indicate that respondent No.1 has not accepted the explanation offered by the petitioner and adopted hyper technical approach in refusing to condone the delay. 5. The material on record, would indicate that the petitioner has been filing his returns always regularly and promptly and has been diligent in paying taxes and has never committed any default in paying taxes or filing the income tax returns earlier. Therefore, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order at Annexure-A and condone the delay in filing the income tax returns and issue certain directions in this regard. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER WP No. 11531 of 2024 4. A perusal of the impugned order would indicate that respondent No.1 has not accepted the explanation offered by the petitioner and adopted hyper technical approach in refusing to condone the delay. 5. The material on record, would indicate that the petitioner has been filing his returns always regularly and promptly and has been diligent in paying taxes and has never committed any default in paying taxes or filing the income tax returns earlier. Therefore, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order at Annexure-A and condone the delay in filing the income tax returns and issue certain directions in this regard. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed; (ii) Impugned order at Annexure-A dated 15.02.2024 is hereby set aside; application filed by the petitioner under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is hereby allowed and delay in filing income tax returns by the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2022-23 is hereby condoned. NC: 2024:KHC:16705 (iii) The respondents are directed to accept the income tax returns of the petitioner and proceed further in accordance with law. Sd/- JUDGE SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6