Wp/2508/2025 Of Seth Ghasiram Gopikishan Badruka Educational Society v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) Income Tax Department
High Court
30 Jan 2025 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wp/2508/2025 Of Seth Ghasiram Gopikishan Badruka Educational Society v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) Income Tax Department
Date of order
30 Jan 2025
Assessment year(s)
2020-21, 2020-2021
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Wp/2508/2025 Of Seth Ghasiram Gopikishan Badruka Educational Society v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption) Income Tax Department, the High Court (2025) decided the matter.
Decision: 7 The Writ Petition is disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
[ [3446 ]]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARYTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAULANDTHE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
WRIT PETITION NO: 2508 OF 2025
Betwee n:
Seth Ghasiram Gopikishan Badruka Educational Society, (Registered under theSocieties Act), Registered Office at 3-2-847, Kachiguda. Hyderabad, represented byits Secretary, Srikishan Badruka S/o Late Sri Hari Prasad G Eadruka
...PETITIONER
AND
'1 . Commissioner of lncome Tax (Exemption) lncome Tax Department, 3rd Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, Opposite L.B. Stadium, Basheer 8agh, Hyderabad, 500044(State of Telangana)Aayakar Bhavan, Opposite L.B. Stadium, Basheer 8agh, Hyderabad, 500044(State of Telangana)
2. Assessing Officer, Exemption Circle 1(1), Income Tax Department, 1st Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, Opposite L.B. Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, 500044Aayakar Bhavan, Opposite L.B. Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, 500044
3. Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax (Exemptions), CBDT, Ministry ofFinance, lncome Tax Department, Govt. of lndia. Room No. ['149A, ]NorthBlock, New Delhi.l 10001Finance, lncome Tax Department, Govt. of lndia. Room No. ['149A, ]NorthBlock, New Delhi.l 10001
4. The Union of lndia rep by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Departrnent ofRevenue, Direct Taxes, Government of lndia, North Block New Delhi-1 10001Revenue, Direct Taxes, Government of lndia, North Block New Delhi-1 10001
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lnd ia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order ordirection to declare the action of the 1st respondent, in [passing ]the rejection orderdt. 13-01-2025 in rejecting the condonation of delay of 4 days under section119(2Xb) submitted by the petitioner along with Form No. lOBB application forthe assessment year 2020-21 is quite contrary to CBDT Circular No. 1512022dated 19.07.2022 and circular No.16/2024 dated 1B-'1 1-2024 and consequentlyset aside the rejection order dt.13-01-2025. by condoning the delay of 4 days and
direct the 1st respondent to deal with the Form No.10BB submitted on 19-01-2021 for Assessment year2020-2021 .
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the [petition, ]the High Court may be [pleased]pleased to suspend the operation of the rejection order dt,13-01-2025 passed bythe 1st respondent for the assessment [year ]2020-21 under the Act, [pending]disposal of the above writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI TEJPRAKASH TOSHNIWAL
Counsel for Respondents No.1to3 : SRI A.RAMA KRISHNA REDDY, Jr.SC for lTCounsel for Resporrdents No.4 : SRI K.SANJEEV, SC FOR UOIThe Court made ther following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
AND
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
WRIT PETITION No.25O8 of 2o25
ORDER (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujog Paul)
Sri Tejprakash Toshniwal, learned counsel for the
peititoner; Sri A. Rama Krishna Reddy, learned Junior StandingCounsel for Income Tax Department, for respondent Nos.1 to 3 andSri K. Sanjeev, Iearned Standing Counsel for respondent No.4-Union of India.
2. With the consent, finally heard.
.)The challenge is mounted to the order dated L3.O1.2O25'"r,hereby [application for ][condonation ][of ][delay ][of ][four ][days filed ][by]'"r,hereby [application for ][condonation ][of ][delay ][of ][four ][days filed ][by]the petitioner in filing Form 1OB report was rejected.
AND
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
WRIT PETITION No.25O8 of 2o25
ORDER (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujog Paul)
Sri Tejprakash Toshniwal, learned counsel for the
peititoner; Sri A. Rama Krishna Reddy, learned Junior StandingCounsel for Income Tax Department, for respondent Nos.1 to 3 andSri K. Sanjeev, Iearned Standing Counsel for respondent No.4-Union of India.
2. With the consent, finally heard.
.)The challenge is mounted to the order dated L3.O1.2O25'"r,hereby [application for ][condonation ][of ][delay ][of ][four ][days filed ][by]'"r,hereby [application for ][condonation ][of ][delay ][of ][four ][days filed ][by]the petitioner in filing Form 1OB report was rejected.
4Criticizing the impugned order dated 13.O1.2025, learnedcounsel for the petitioner submits that little delay of four days wasproperly explained. The delay, admittedly, occurred during theCOVID pandemic period as the petitioner during that period was inisolation. The petitioner's stand was discarded by holding thateven if the petitioner was quarantined/ isolated during COVIDperiod, nothing prevented it to digitally sign the relevant documentsand furnish them to the Department through online.properly explained. The delay, admittedly, occurred during theCOVID pandemic period as the petitioner during that period was inisolation. The petitioner's stand was discarded by holding thateven if the petitioner was quarantined/ isolated during COVIDperiod, nothing prevented it to digitally sign the relevant documentsand furnish them to the Department through online.
I
5Learned counsel for the other side supportecl the impugnedorder.order.
6. It is not in dispute that the delay was only for four daysand such delay occurred during COVID pandemic period when thepetitioner was in isolation, Thus, learned authority ought to haveconsidered tht: application leniently but, rather, dealt with it onhyper technical grounds. The impugned order, declining tocondone the delay of mere four days, cannot with stand judicialscrutiny. In our opinion, for condonation of delay of four days,sufficient cause has been shown. Thus, the impugned order dated13.o1.2025 is set aside and the proceedings are restored in the fileof respondent No. 1. Respondent No.1 shall decide the proceedingson its own merits.
7
The Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
To,
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also standclosed.SD/- P. PADMANABHAP. PADMANABHAPADMANABHAASSISTANT REG//TRUE COPY//
SD/- P. PADMANABHAP. PADMANABHAPADMANABHAREDDYASSISTANT REGISTRAR
\SECTION OFFICER
'I . The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Exemption) Income Tax Department, 3rdFloor, Aayakar Bhavan, Opposite L.B. Stadium, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad,500044 (State of Telangana )Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Opposite L.B. Stadium, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad,500044 (State of Telangana )
2. The Assessing [Officer. ]Exemption Circle 1(1), lncome Tax Department, [1st]Floor, Aayakar [Bhavan, ]Opposite L.B. Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad,500044Floor, Aayakar [Bhavan, ]Opposite L.B. Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad,500044
3. The Principal Chief [Commissioner ]of [lncome ]Tax [(Exemptions). ]CBDT,Ivlinistry of Finance, [lncome Tax ]Department, Govt. of lqdia, Room No. ['149A,]North 6lock, Ne:w Delhi 110001 -'"Ivlinistry of Finance, [lncome Tax ]Department, Govt. of lqdia, Room No. ['149A,]North 6lock, Ne:w Delhi 110001 -'"
4. lhe [Secretary, Ministry ][of ][Finance' Union,of lndia ][Department ][of ][Revenue']Direct [Taxes, ][cou"'n"Xi ot'ii'iii' ][i'r"'t' ][etock ][New ][Delhi-l ][10001]Direct [Taxes, ][cou"'n"Xi ot'ii'iii' ][i'r"'t' ][etock ][New ][Delhi-l ][10001]
5. One [ ][to SRI TEJPRAKASH ][TOSHNIWAL' Advocate' ][ ]
One [ ]6 one CC [to ] [A'RAMA ] [REDDY' ][Jr'SC ][for ][lncome ][Tax]DePartment [OPUCIDePartment [OPUCI
7. One [to SRI ] [SANJEEV' ] [for ][Union ][of ][lndia ][lOPUCl]
8. Two [CD CoPies']
BSKGJP[?k]
I
I
I
I
\\
HIGH COUR'T
DATED:3010112025
4. lhe [Secretary, Ministry ][of ][Finance' Union,of lndia ][Department ][of ][Revenue']Direct [Taxes, ][cou"'n"Xi ot'ii'iii' ][i'r"'t' ][etock ][New ][Delhi-l ][10001]Direct [Taxes, ][cou"'n"Xi ot'ii'iii' ][i'r"'t' ][etock ][New ][Delhi-l ][10001]
5. One [ ][to SRI TEJPRAKASH ][TOSHNIWAL' Advocate' ][ ]
One [ ]6 one CC [to ] [A'RAMA ] [REDDY' ][Jr'SC ][for ][lncome ][Tax]DePartment [OPUCIDePartment [OPUCI
7. One [to SRI ] [SANJEEV' ] [for ][Union ][of ][lndia ][lOPUCl]
8. Two [CD CoPies']
BSKGJP[?k]
I
I
I
I
\\
HIGH COUR'T
DATED:3010112025
t+t'1[g ][STAt4](1.IaJo [q ][uni, ][ztt5 ]io*f;C r',--:-
ORDER
WP.No.2508 of 2025
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS@"a4.r9t [1.."]4.
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.