Wp/2516/2025 Of Sri Venkatesh Gorakshini Trust v. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption)

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH TWO THOUSAND AND PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE ANDTHE HONOURABLE JUSTICE WRIT PETITION NO: [2516 OF ][2025] Between: Sri Venkatesh Gorakshini [Trust, ][Registered ][Office ][al ][3-2-847, ][Kachiguda'][vo"*6io-, i"preienteo by [its ][managing ][trustee, Srikishan Badruka S/o ][Late]Sri Hari Prasad G Badruka ...PETITIONER AND 1. Commissioner of [lncome ][Tax (Exemption)' ][lncome ][Tax ][Department,el^!1o.o1']AivJrii ehavan, opposite [L.Ei. ][Stadium, ][Basheer ][Bagh, ][Hyderabad' ][500044](State of Telangana)AivJrii ehavan, opposite [L.Ei. ][Stadium, ][Basheer ][Bagh, ][Hyderabad' ][500044](State of Telangana) 2. - Assessing Officer, A;t;k;i 6ha*n,bpposite [Exemption ]L.B. Staditini, Basheerbagh, Hvderabad, 500044[Circle ].'t [('l ]), [lncome ][Tax ][Department, ].1s ^Floor'(State of Telangana)(State of Telangana) 3. PrinciDal chief commissioner [of ][lncome Tax ][(Exemptions), cBDT, ][IMinistry ][of]- Finanbe, lncome Tax Department, Govt. of lndia, Room No' 149A, NorthBlock, New Delhi.l [10001.]- Finanbe, lncome Tax Department, Govt. of lndia, Room No' 149A, NorthBlock, New Delhi.l [10001.] 4. The Union of lndia, rep. [by its Secretary' ][MlnisJry ][of ][Finance, ][Depqff.e.{pj-]nevenue, Direct Tixe's, [dovernment ][of india, N6rth Block New ][Delhi-1 10001 ][.]nevenue, Direct Tixe's, [dovernment ][of india, N6rth Block New ][Delhi-1 10001 ][.] ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article [226 ][of ][the constitution ][of ][lndia ][praying ][that in ][the]circumstances stated in the [affidavit ][filed ][therewith, ][the ][High ][court ][may ][be]pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus [or ][any ][other ][appropriate ][writ, order ][or]direction to declare the [action ][of ][the ][1't ][respondent, in passing ][the ][rejection order]dt.l3lolt2ozsinrejectingthecondonationofdelayof4daysunderSection119(2Xb) submitted submitted [by the ][petitioner ][along ][with ][Form ][No ][10B]application for the assessment [year ][2O2O-21 ][is ][quite contrary ][to ] [Circular]No.2t2o2Odt.o3.o1.2O2oandCircularNo.16t2o24dated18i1112024and consequently set aside the rejection order dt.13-01-2025,|>y :ondoning the delayof 4 days and direct the 1st respondent to deal with the Forrn IJo.10B submitted on19-01-2021 for assessment yeat 2O2O-ZOZ1. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the circ rmstances stated inthe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased tothe affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased tosuspend the operation of the rejection order dt.13tO1l2O2S passed by the 1strespondent for the assessment year 2020-21 under the Act, pending disposal ofthe above writ petition.the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI TEJPRAKASH TOSHNIWAL Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: SRI A. RAMAKRISHhIA REDDy,SC FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI K. SANJEEV, SC FOR UNION OF INDIAThe Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHrEF JUSTICE SUJoy PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENT'KA YARA WRTT PETITIO N No.25l6 ot2o25 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, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.4-Union of India. 2. With the consent, frnally heard. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI TEJPRAKASH TOSHNIWAL Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: SRI A. RAMAKRISHhIA REDDy,SC FOR INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI K. SANJEEV, SC FOR UNION OF INDIAThe Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHrEF JUSTICE SUJoy PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENT'KA YARA WRTT PETITIO N No.25l6 ot2o25 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, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.4-Union of India. 2. With the consent, frnally heard. 3. The challenge is mounted to the order dated 13.O1.2025whereby application for condonation of delay of four days li1ed bythe petitioner in filing Form 1OB report was rejected.4. Criticizing the impugned order dated 13.01.2025, 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. tt rl i 5. Learned counsel for the other side supporl.ed the impugnedorder. 6. It is not in dispute that the delay was only for four daysis not in dispute that the delay was only for four daysin dispute that the delay was only for four daysdispute that the delay was only for four daysthat the delay was only for four daysthe delay was only for four daysdelay was only for four dayswas only for four daysonly for four daysfor four daysfour daysdaysand such delay occurred during COVID panderrLic period when thepetitioner was in isolation. Thus, learned auth,crity ought to haveconsidered the application leniently but, rather, dealt with it onhyper technical grounds. The impugned ordr:r, declining tocondone the delay of mere fou days, cannot withstand judicia,lscrutiny. In our opinion, for condonation of dekr.y of four days,sufficient cause has been shown. Thus, the impugped order datedL3.O1.2O25 is set aside and the proceedings are re store<l in the fileof respondent No. 1. Respondent No.1 sha1l decide the proceedingson its own meri1.s. It is not in dispute that the delay was only for four daysis not in dispute that the delay was only for four daysin dispute that the delay was only for four daysdispute that the delay was only for four daysthat the delay was only for four daysthe delay was only for four daysdelay was only for four dayswas only for four daysonly for four daysfor four daysfour daysdays 7. The Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs Interlocutory applications, if any pending, sha11 also stald closed. SD/. V,KAVITHAASSISiTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// .,1SECTION OFFICER To, 1Commissioner of lncome Tax (Exemption), lncome Tax D,:partment,3rd Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, Opposite L.B. Stadium, Basheer Bagh, l{yderabad, 500044(State of Telangana)Aayakar Bhavan, Opposite L.B. Stadium, Basheer Bagh, l{yderabad, 500044(State of Telangana)2Assessing Officer, Exemption Circle 1(1 ), lncome Tax Department, 1 st Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, Opposite L.B. Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, 500044(State of Telangana)Aayakar Bhavan, Opposite L.B. Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, 500044(State of Telangana) 3Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax (Exemptions), CBDT, Ministry ofFinance, lncome Tax Department, Govt. of lndia, Room Nc. 149A, NorthBlock, New Delhi.l 1 0001.Finance, lncome Tax Department, Govt. of lndia, Room Nc. 149A, NorthBlock, New Delhi.l 1 0001. 7 I TJ m 4 I19 S_9919tqry, Ministry. of Finance_, .Department of Revenue, Direct Taxes,sovernmenr oI rndra, rhe union of lndia, North Block New Delhi-1 1ooo1 .sovernmenr oI rndra, rhe union of lndia, North Block New Delhi-1 1ooo1 . 3Principal Chief Commissioner of lncome Tax (Exemptions), CBDT, Ministry ofFinance, lncome Tax Department, Govt. of lndia, Room Nc. 149A, NorthBlock, New Delhi.l 1 0001.Finance, lncome Tax Department, Govt. of lndia, Room Nc. 149A, NorthBlock, New Delhi.l 1 0001. 7 I TJ m 4 I19 S_9919tqry, Ministry. of Finance_, .Department of Revenue, Direct Taxes,sovernmenr oI rndra, rhe union of lndia, North Block New Delhi-1 1ooo1 .sovernmenr oI rndra, rhe union of lndia, North Block New Delhi-1 1ooo1 . 5. One CC to Sri Tejprakash Toshniwat Advocate tOpUCltOpUCl 6. One CC to Sri A. Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate tOpUCltOpUClI. 9n" QQ [t_o ][Sf ][K.Sanjeev, Advocate (OPUC)]B. Two CD CopiesB. Two CD Copies s II f HIGH COURT ( DATED:3010112025 tI,\iiE [srAr]tso.A{qaoo)12 [tiB]?$25},oItOa S PAl [(] ORDER WP.No.2516 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS @P"riuw" ,{attt&.-