ANUPAM GIAN VIKAS PARI SHAD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION DELHI & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/5635/2025HC DelhiDLHC01025118202530 April 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the respondents to decide the petitioner's application for condonation of delay in filing Form 10BB for AY 2020-21, which was filed on 13.03.2024, as expeditiously as possible and within a period of eight weeks from the date of the order. The Court clarified that all rights and contentions of the parties are reserved. The reasoning was based on the concession made by the Revenue's counsel, who agreed to the prayer for a direction to decide the earlier application. The Court found that if this earlier application were decided favourably, the other reliefs sought by the petitioner would become infructuous. The issue of whether the application for condonation was filed within the prescribed time limit, or whether the delay was justifiable, was implicitly left to be decided by the concerned authorities upon adjudication of the petitioner's application dated 13.03.2024.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Anupam Gian Vikas Parishad, a charitable trust registered under Section 12A and entitled to exemption under Section 10(23C), filed its income tax return for Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21 on 15.02.2021. However, there was a delay of 31 days in filing Form 10BB, which was required to be filed at least one month prior to the return. The petitioner attributes this delay to mitigating circumstances arising from the Covid-19 pandemic. An application dated 19.12.2024 seeking condonation of this delay, filed under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was rejected by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Delhi on 29.01.2025. The rejection was based on the ground that the application was filed beyond the three-year period from the end of the assessment year. The petitioner contends it had filed an earlier application for condonation on 13.03.2024, on which no decision was taken.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, should direct the respondents to adjudicate upon the petitioner's application dated 13.03.2024 filed under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, seeking condonation of delay in filing Form 10BB for AY 2020-21? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 119(2)(b) and procedural fairness). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argues that its earlier application dated 13.03.2024, seeking the same relief, has not been adjudicated. If this earlier application is considered, the objection regarding the delay in filing the condonation application beyond three years would not be valid. The delay in filing Form 10BB was due to Covid-19 related mitigating circumstances and did not prejudice the assessment as it was filed along with the return. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the Revenue stated that they have no objection to a direction being issued to the concerned authorities to decide the petitioner's application dated 13.03.2024. They also acknowledged that if a favourable order is obtained on that application, the other reliefs sought in the present petition would not survive.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 119(2)(b),Section 10(23C),Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

W.P.(C) 5635/2025 Page 1 of 4 $~105 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 30.04.2025 + W.P.(C) 5635/2025 ANUPAM GIAN VIKAS PARI SHAD .....Petitioner Through: Mr Ajay Pal Kullar with Mr Pranndy Dey, Advocates. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr Shivendra Singh and Mr Yojit Pareek, JSCs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA VIBHU BAKHRU, J. (ORAL) CM No.25679/2025 (for exemption) 1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. The application is disposed of. W.P.(C) 5635/2025 & CM No.25678/2025 3. Issue notice. The learned counsel for the respondents accepts notice. 4. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under: “A) issue a Writ of certiorari/ mandamus or any other Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:08.05.2025 15:55:39 Signature Not Verified

W.P.(C) 5635/2025 Page 2 of 4 appropriate Writ/ order/direction quashing of the Impugned Order dated 29/01/2025 bearing no: ITBA/COM/F/17/2024- 25/1072676460 (1) passed by the Respondent No. 1, whereby the application dated 19.12.2024 of the Petitioner seeking condonation of delay in filing the FORM 10BB for the Assessment Year 2020-21 was rejected/dismissed; B) issue a Writ of certiorari/ mandamus or any other appropriate Writ/ order/ direction against the Respondents to adjudicate and pass appropriate orders on the application dated 13.03.2024 filed by the Petitioner u/s 119 (2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking condonation of delay in filing the FORM 10BB for the Assessment Year 2020-21; C) issue a Writ of certiorari/ mandamus or any other appropriate Writ/ order/ direction against the Respondents to not initiate any proceedings under the Income Tax-Act, 1961 qua the Petitioner pending adjudication of the application for condonation of delay in filing the FORM 10BB u/s 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2020- 21.” 5. The petitioner is, essentially, aggrieved by rejection of its application under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] seeking condonation of delay in filing Form 10BB in respect of Assessment Year [AY] 2020-21. 6. The petitioner is a trust formed for charitable purposes. It is registered under Section 12A of the Act and is entitled to claim exemption under Section 10(23C) of the Act. The petitioner states that it has been running an educational institution, New Happy Public School, at Narela since 01.04.1989 and the school fee structure is the lowest compared to other schools in the vicinity. 7. The petitioner has been regularly filing its return of income and has Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:08.05.2025 15:55:39 Signature Not Verified

W.P.(C) 5635/2025 Page 3 of 4 been consistently granted exemption under Section 10(23C) of the Act. The petitioner had also filed its return of income for AY 2020-21 on 15.02.2021 along with a report in the Form 10BB of the Act. Whilst the income tax return was within time, there was a delay of 31(thirty-one) days in filing the Form 10BB, which was required to be filed at least one month prior to the return. 8. The petitioner submits that there were mitigating circumstances resulting from the outbreak of Covid-19, and therefore, there was a delay of 31(thirty-one) days in filing the said form. It is also submitted that the same did not prejudice the assessment in any manner as it was filed along with the return. 9. The petitioner’s application dated 19.12.2024 for seeking condonation of delay in terms of the circular dated 18.11.2024 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes [CBDT] was rejected by the impugned order dated 29.01.2025 on the ground that the application for condonation of delay had been filed beyond the period of three years from the end of the assessment year. The petitioner claims that it had also filed an earlier application for condonation of delay within the period of three years, being an application dated 13.03.2024. But no decision has been taken in respect of the said application. The petitioner filed another application on 19.12.2024, which has been dismissed by the impugned order. 10. The petitioner states that if its earlier application, which is for the same relief, is considered then the objection that the petitioner had not applied within a period of three years would not hold good. Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:08.05.2025 15:55:39 Signature Not Verified

W.P.(C) 5635/2025 Page 4 of 4 11. The learned counsel appearing for the Revenue fairly submits that he would have no objection in regard to the petitioner’s prayer for a direction to the concerned authorities to decide the petitioner’s application dated 13.03.2024 filed under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. He points out that if the petitioner secures a favourable order, the other reliefs as sought for in the present petition would not survive. 12. In view of the above, we direct the respondents to decide the petitioner’s application for condonation of delay in filing the Form 10BB for the AY 2020-21 that was filed on 13.03.2024, as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of eight weeks from date. 13. We, however, clarify that all rights and contentions of the parties are reserved. 14. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending application is also disposed of. VIBHU BAKHRU, J TEJAS KARIA, J APRIL 30, 2025/tr Click here to check corrigendum, if any Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA Signing Date:08.05.2025 15:55:39 Signature Not Verified

More judgments on Section 119(2)(b)

All 980 judgments and leading authorities on Section 119(2)(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →