JTL EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION) CHANDIGARH
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court found that the power to condone the delay in filing the audit report is available with the department. The Court held that the audit report, once filed on record, ought to be considered and should not be ignored. The Court reasoned that a delay of 30 days in filing the audit report for assessment years 2019-2020, 2020-21, and 2021-22 should not preclude condonation. Consequently, the Court decided to condone the delay and directed that the audit report be taken on record. The order dated 07.03.2024 passed by the respondent was set aside, and the respondent was directed to pass a fresh order on merits. The ratio decidendi is that a reasonable delay in filing an audit report, especially when the report is otherwise on record, should be condoned by the tax authorities, and the power to condone such delays should be exercised liberally.
What were the facts?
The petitioner, JTL Educational Foundation, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 07.03.2024 passed by the respondent, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption). The petitioner had submitted its audit report in Form 10B after the prescribed due date. The respondent had refused to condone the delay of 30 days in filing the audit report. The petitioner argued that the delay was not substantial and should have been condoned. The respondent contended that timely filing of Form 10B is a basic eligibility condition for seeking exemption and that the petitioner was negligent. The present petition was considered along with a connected case, CWP-7180-2024.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the delay of 30 days in filing the audit report in Form 10B for assessment years 2019-2020, 2020-21, and 2021-22 can be condoned by the respondent, and if so, whether the refusal to condone the delay was justified, turning on the interpretation of the powers of the department to condone delays in filing such reports. Assessee's Contentions: - The audit report was prepared and submitted, albeit after the prescribed date. - A delay of 30 days is not substantial and should be condoned. Revenue's Contentions: - The timely filing of Form 10B is a basic eligibility condition for seeking exemption. - The petitioner was negligent in filing the audit report belatedly. - The respondents have filed their reply in the connected case, CWP-7180-2024, which is considered in the present case.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
CWP-7179-202 267
IN T JTL EDUCAT COMMISSION
CORAM: H
H Present: M M
f SANJEEV PR
Admitt submitt prescrib 2. The de condon i.e.CWP the only belated 3. Counse the pre exempt 4 (O&M)
Page 1 of 2 THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH
TIONAL FOUNDATION Vs. NER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP **** HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJA **** Ms. Sidhi Bansal, Advocate and Ms. Ridhi Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Varun Issar, Sr. Standing Co for the respondents/Revenue. **** RAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) edly, the audit report was pre ted by the petitioner albeit aft bed date of filing of audit report. elay of 30 days cannot be said ned. The respondents have filed t P-7180-2024 which is considere y contention raised by the respon dly uploaded. el for the Revenue submits that escribed timeline is a basic el tion. It is also submitted that the B AND HARYANA AT H CWP-7179-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11.11.2024 . . . . Petitioner TION), CHANDIGARH . . . . Respondent EEV PRAKASH SHARMA AY VASHISTH ounsel epared in Form 10B and was ter a period of 30 days of the . d to be such which cannot be their reply in the connected case ed in the present case. However, ndent is that the audit report was t the filing of Form 10B within ligibility condition for seeking petitioner had been negligent in
) 4 r t s e e e , s n g n MOHIT GOYAL 2024.11.12 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-7179-202 timely and 20 delay. 4. We fin departm conside condon The ord fresh or 5. Writ Pe 6. All pen
November 11, Mohit goyal 1. Whethe 2. Whethe 4 (O&M)
Page 2 of 2 filing audit reports for assessm 21-22, and therefore there shou nd that the power to condone t ment. The audit report, once ered and the same ought not b ne the delay and direct that the au der dated 07.03.2024 is set asid rder on merits. etition is accordingly allowed. nding applications also stand disp
(SAN , 2024 r speaking/reasoned?
Y r reportable?
Y ment years 2019-2020, 2020-21, uld not be any condonation of the delay is available with the it is on record, ought to be be ignored. In view thereto, we udit report to be taken on record. de. The respondent shall pass a posed of. NJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No
, f e e e . a MOHIT GOYAL 2024.11.12 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
