CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. CRYPTOGRAPH TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE 2(1),BENGALURU INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, BMTC BUILDING, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, 80FT ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 095

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), BENGALURU INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, BMTC BUILDING, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, 80FT ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 095 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. E.I.SANMATHI.,ADVOCATE A/W SRI. NIRMAL MATHEW, ADVOCATE )

The appellants/Revenue are in appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961

Learned counsel Sri.E.I.Sanmathi for appellants/Revenue would submit that learned Single Judge failed to appreciate that the authorities would get jurisdiction to condone the delay only if the assessee is able to provide genuine hardship as the reason for condonation of delay. He submits that respondent/assessee has not assigned any genuine hardship to condone the delay. Moreover, he submits that though health issues of the director of the company are urged by the respondent as genuine hardship for delay in filing the returns, no documents in support of such circumstances are placed on record. In that circumstance,

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent would support the order passed by the learned Single Judge and submits that learned Single Judge has properly exercised his jurisdiction and condoned the delay. Thus, he would pray for dismissal of the writ appeal.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ appeal papers, we are not inclined to interfere with the learned Single Judge’s order in exercising its jurisdiction to condone the delay in filing the income tax returns for the assessment year 2022-23 under Section 119(2)(b) of 1961 Act.

We have perused the application filed by the respondent/assessee under Section 119(2)(b) of 1961 Act for condonation of delay in filing the income tax returns for assessment year 2022-23. The application would indicate that the health issues of the Director of the respondent-

Taking note of the above, learned Single Judge was of the opinion that the authorities were not justified in refusing to condone the delay by adopting hyper technical approach. The reasons stated by the respondent are genuine hardships which cannot be brushed aside since it was subsequent to COVID period. While considering the application for condonation of delay, the authorities or Courts or Tribunals shall be liberal and the Court or Tribunal or Authorities shall examine as to whether there is malafide intention or delay is deliberate in approaching the authorities or Court or Tribunal. If there is no such deliberate or intentional delay, the delay shall have to be condoned by taking a liberal approach.

Thus, we do not find any error or illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge. There is no merit in the writ appeal and accordingly, writ appeal stands rejected.