PRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. PADUMUNDU MILK PRODUCERS WOMEN

PDF · subscribers
WA/4013/2019HC KarnatakaKAHC01053463201904 January 2021Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,M G UMA4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax to consider the application filed under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act expeditiously and in accordance with law within three months.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against a High Court order that had set aside an order passed under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, leading to the condonation of delay in filing returns. The revenue argued that the application under Section 119(2)(b) had not yet been considered.

What were the issues?

Whether the application for condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) should be considered before processing the return under Section 143(3) and whether a direction to consider the application was more appropriate than a blanket setting aside of the order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 119(2)(b),Section 143(1),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G.UMA

WRIT APPEAL NO.4013 OF 2019 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

1.

PRL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AAYAKAR BHAVAN C.R.BUILDING N.G.ROAD, ATTAVARA MANGALURU-565 001.

2.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE BENGALURU-560 500.

3.

INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-2 AAYAKAR BHAVAN ADI-UDUPI MALPE ROAD UDUPI-576 103. ... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI: E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S PADUMUNDU MILK PRODUCERS WOMEN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY SHIRIYARA VILLAGE SAIBRAKATTE POST

BRAHMAVARA TALUK UDIPI DISTRICT-576 210 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MRS.CHAITHRA. ... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI: MAHESH R.UPPIN, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19.9.2019 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NO.29584 OF 2019 (T-IT) BY THE HON’BLE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE.

THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

J U D G M E N T

The revenue has preferred this intra Court appeal assailing the order dated 19.09.2019 passed in Writ Petition No.29584 of 2019. The said writ petition was heard along with other writ petitions and common order was passed setting aside the order passed under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for the sake of brevity). In those cases, where there was rejection of the application filed under the said Section, consequently the delay in filing the returns was not condoned.

2.

Learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that in this case, the application filed under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act has not yet been taken up for consideration, but inadvertently there is a remand in the instant matter also just as in the other cases. He submitted that instead, a direction could be issued to consider the said application seeking condonation of delay in accordance with law. He further submitted that till date, the return filed has been considered only for the limited purpose of Section 143(1) of the Act and no order has been made under Section 143(3) of the Act as the return has not been taken up for being processed under Section 143(3) of the Act.

3.

Learned Counsel for the respondent does not oppose the submission made by the learned Counsel for the appellants. Respondent’s counsel also submitted that a direction may be issued to consider the application filed by the respondent under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act in an

expeditious manner and in accordance with law, if not already disposed.

4.

In the circumstances, this appeal is disposed by directing respondent No.1 in the writ petition/appellant No.1 herein to consider the application filed under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act in an expeditious manner and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the judgment and in accordance with law.

Ordered accordingly.

No costs.

In view of the disposal of appeal, pending applications, if any, stand disposed.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE *bgn/-

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 →