Wp/28127/2024 Of M/S. Discovery Global Ministry v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions)

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAULANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAOWRIT PETITION NO: 28127 OF 2024 Between: Mis. Discovery Global Ministry, Plot No.303, 3rd Floor, SBRs Towers, HitechCity, Madhapur, Hyderabad. Rep. by its Managing Trustee Mr.VuppulaEbenezer Benjamin ...PET'*.NER AND 1. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Exemptions), 2nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan,Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 004.500 004.Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 004.500 004. Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 004.500 004.2, The Income Tax Officer, Office of the Commissioner of lncome Tax EHyderabadHyderabad 3. The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Exemption Circle I Hydera-bad4. The Union of lndia, Rep. by its Secretary Ministry of Finance 64 3'' floorJeevan Deep Building sansad Marg New Delhi 4. The Union of lndia, Rep. by its Secretary Ministry of Finance 64 3'' floorJeevan Deep Building sansad Marg New Delhi ...RES'.NDENT' Petition under Article 226 of the Constitutron of lndia praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to issue Writ of [\Iandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order orDirection declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in rejecting the Applicationfor Condonation of Delay filed by the Petitioner in Form ['108 ]under Section119(2)(b) of the lncome Tax Act 1961, vide Orders, dated 08.08.2024 for theAssessment Years 2017 -18 and 2022-23 under the lncome Tax Act, 1961,without referring to any contentions of the Petitioner and much less not evengranting an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner, as arbitrary, contrary tothe provisions of the Act, bias and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice andRule of Law and consequently set aside the orders of the 1st Respondent dated08.08.2024 as null and void IA NO: 't [oF ][2024] Petition [under Section ]['151 ][CPC praying that ][in ][the ][circumstancres ][stated ][in]the affidavit [filed in ][support ][of ][the ][petition' ][the ][High Court ][may be ][pleased to]Suspendthe Operation [of ][the ][Order, ][dated ][08 ][08 ][2024 ][passed ][by the ][1st]Respondent in re.iecting [the ][Application ][for ][Condonation ][of ][Delay ][ircluding ][the]Dema ndNotice of the [3'd ][Respondent, ][dated ][05 ][06 2024 ][for ][the ][Assessment]Years 2017-18 [and 2022-23 ][under the][ lncome Tax ][Act ][1961, pendin{l disposal ][of]the above [Writ ][Petition ][as ][otheMise' ][the Petitioner ][will ][be put to severe loss ][and]hardshiP Counsel [for the Petitioner: ][SRI' SHAIK ] MS. SHAIK Counsel [for the Respondent Nos' ][1to3: ] [A](sR sc FoR [cBlT ] [C)] counser for [the Respondent No'4: ][SRr ][B' ]HXS|S[i5ESF[uro*, _. -- _. --oV. Sor-tctroR [oF ] The Court made [the ][following: ] r'i.3i''XfI I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE TIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAOWRIT PETITION No.28127 of 2o24 ORDER (per Hon'ble SP,J) Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, learned counsel represents Ms. Shaik Vaheeda Sushma, learned counsel for the petitioner,Sri A.Radha Krishna, learned Senjor Standing Counsel, appearedfor respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counselrepresenting Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy SolicitorGeneral of India, appeared for respondent No.4. 2. With the consent hnallv heard. counser for [the Respondent No'4: ][SRr ][B' ]HXS|S[i5ESF[uro*, _. -- _. --oV. Sor-tctroR [oF ] The Court made [the ][following: ] r'i.3i''XfI I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE TIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAOWRIT PETITION No.28127 of 2o24 ORDER (per Hon'ble SP,J) Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, learned counsel represents Ms. Shaik Vaheeda Sushma, learned counsel for the petitioner,Sri A.Radha Krishna, learned Senjor Standing Counsel, appearedfor respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counselrepresenting Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy SolicitorGeneral of India, appeared for respondent No.4. 2. With the consent hnallv heard. 3. The challenge mounted in this petition frled under article226 of the Constitution is to the impugned order dated 08.Oa.2024(annexure-P1), whereby application of the petitioner forcondonation of delay frled under Section 119 (2) (b) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961, has been rejected by respondent No. 1. Criticizingthe said order, learned counsel for the petitioner, placed reliance onthe application for condonation of delay dated 24.O4-2024(annexure-P5) wherein the petitioner prayed for condonation ofdelay and in support thereof hled medical reports. It is argued thatthere is no iota of discussion on the said reason in the impugnedorder. Respondent No. I considered only the legai position and I i i II i i without consiclering the [factual ][matrix ][of ][the ][present ][case, ][rejected]the application in [a ][mechanical manner.] Sri A.lRadha A.lRadha Krishna, [[learned Senior Standing rlounsel ]][[for]] 4. Sri A.lRadha A.lRadha Krishna, [[learned Senior Standing rlounsel ]][[for]]respondent Nos.1 to 3, [supported ][the ][impugned ][order ][and]submitted that the [impugned ][order contains sufficient legal ][basis]and does not require [any interference.] 5. No olher point is [pressed ][by ][learned counsel ][for ][the]parties. 6. A careful reading of the [application filed ][b1' ][the ][petitioner]for condonation of delay [shows ][that ][in ][column ][14, ][he ][mentioned]that delay of 35 days is [because ][of ][" ][due ][to ][m'edical ][health ][issud']and in support thereof [hled ][medical ][reports. ][A microscopic reading]of the impugned [ord.er ][shows ][that ][respondent ][No' ][1 ][has; ][considered]the [judgments ]of the [Supreme ][Court ][and ][other ][High Courts on ][the]question of condonation of delay. [What ][is ][mis:;ing ][is ][the]consideration on the [reasons ][assigned ][by ][the petitiontrr about ][the]delay of 35 clays. While [considering an application ][for ][:ondonation]of deiay, the authority is required [to ][apply ][its mind ][on ][the ][facts ][of a]particular case to determine whether the [delay ][is ][properly]explained and rn hether it constitutes [" ][suffi.cient ][causd'. ln ][absence]thereof, mere reproduction of [judgments ][of ][the ][Courts and ][without]considering the facts of a particular case is of [no ][use.] a 7. The reasons are held to be heartbeat of conclusions. Inabsence of reasons, conclusions cannot sustain judicial scrutiny.We find substance in the argument of learned counsel for thepetitioner that there is no iota of discussion and finding in theimpugned order as to why the reasons given by the petitioner,supported by the medical reports, are not to be treated astrustworthy. Thus, the impugned order, in our opinion, cannotsustain judicial scrutiny. 8. Resultantly, the impugned impugned order dated 08.08.2024, 08.08.2024, is setsetaside. The application for condonation of delay is revived andrespondent No.1 shall rehear the petitioner and pass a fresh orderin accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has notexpressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Resultantly, the impugned impugned order dated 08.08.2024, 08.08.2024, is setset 9. The Writ Petition is disposed of- No costs. closed Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand 8. Resultantly, the impugned impugned order dated 08.08.2024, 08.08.2024, is setsetaside. The application for condonation of delay is revived andrespondent No.1 shall rehear the petitioner and pass a fresh orderin accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has notexpressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Resultantly, the impugned impugned order dated 08.08.2024, 08.08.2024, is setset 9. The Writ Petition is disposed of- No costs. closed Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand SD'. K.SREERAMA MURfHYASsrsrANr REGJR^R//TRUE COPY//SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Exemptions), 2nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan,Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 004. 1. The Commissioner of lncome Tax (Exemptions), 2nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan,Basheerbagh, Hyderabad - 500 004.2. The lncome Tax Offlcer, Office of the Commissioner of lncome Tax E Hyderabad3. The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Exemption Circle I Hyderabad4. The Secretary, Union of lndia, Secretary l\ilinistry of Finance 6A 3 floor Jeevan DeepBuilding Sansad t\Iarg New Delhi3. The Assistant Commissioner of lncome Tax, Exemption Circle I Hyderabad4. The Secretary, Union of lndia, Secretary l\ilinistry of Finance 6A 3 floor Jeevan DeepBuilding Sansad t\Iarg New Delhi5. One CC to SRl. SHAIK VAHEEDA SUSHUIA, Advocate 6. One CC to SRl. RADHA KRISHNA A (SR SC FOR CBIT AND C) IOPUCI7. ONe CC to SRI- GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DY, SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIAloPUCl6. One CC to SRl. RADHA KRISHNA A (SR SC FOR CBIT AND C) IOPUCI7. ONe CC to SRI- GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DY, SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIAloPUCl8. Two CD CopiesBMGJPBMGJP HIGH COURT DATED:1411012024 -==::_...7- [lrt].1,:, [t]t:f,\lrI ,i i'lt Z0Z4.i,\.\,\,-2, ORDER WP.No.28127 ot [2024] DISPOSING OF WITHOUT COSTS .t@e'WV