SHREE GURU NITHYANANDA SOUHARDA vs. PRL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

12 WP No.29110/2018 Navanidhi Vividhoddesha Sahakare Sangha Ltd Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 147 days in filing Return. Not aware of compulsory filing of Income Tax Return. Hence there is a delay in filing the Return. WP No.28873/2018 Thombathu Milk Producers Co-Operative Society Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 30 days in filing Return

BALKURU HALU UTHPADAKARA vs. PRL COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

12 WP No.29110/2018 Navanidhi Vividhoddesha Sahakare Sangha Ltd Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 147 days in filing Return. Not aware of compulsory filing of Income Tax Return. Hence there is a delay in filing the Return. WP No.28873/2018 Thombathu Milk Producers Co-Operative Society Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 30 days in filing Return

THOMBATHU MILK PRODUCERS vs. PRL COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

12 WP No.29110/2018 Navanidhi Vividhoddesha Sahakare Sangha Ltd Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 147 days in filing Return. Not aware of compulsory filing of Income Tax Return. Hence there is a delay in filing the Return. WP No.28873/2018 Thombathu Milk Producers Co-Operative Society Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 30 days in filing Return

KERADI MILK PRODUCERS WOMEN S vs. PRL COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

12 WP No.29110/2018 Navanidhi Vividhoddesha Sahakare Sangha Ltd Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 147 days in filing Return. Not aware of compulsory filing of Income Tax Return. Hence there is a delay in filing the Return. WP No.28873/2018 Thombathu Milk Producers Co-Operative Society Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 30 days in filing Return

NAVANIDHI VIVIDHODDESHA vs. PRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

12 WP No.29110/2018 Navanidhi Vividhoddesha Sahakare Sangha Ltd Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 147 days in filing Return. Not aware of compulsory filing of Income Tax Return. Hence there is a delay in filing the Return. WP No.28873/2018 Thombathu Milk Producers Co-Operative Society Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 30 days in filing Return

SASTHAVU HALU UTHPADAKARA MAHILA vs. PRL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

12 WP No.29110/2018 Navanidhi Vividhoddesha Sahakare Sangha Ltd Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 147 days in filing Return. Not aware of compulsory filing of Income Tax Return. Hence there is a delay in filing the Return. WP No.28873/2018 Thombathu Milk Producers Co-Operative Society Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 30 days in filing Return

K M CREDIT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LTD vs. PRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

12 WP No.29110/2018 Navanidhi Vividhoddesha Sahakare Sangha Ltd Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 147 days in filing Return. Not aware of compulsory filing of Income Tax Return. Hence there is a delay in filing the Return. WP No.28873/2018 Thombathu Milk Producers Co-Operative Society Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 30 days in filing Return

M/S M.B. PATIL CONSTRUCTIONS LTD. vs. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER AND ANR

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice S.Vishwajith Shetty W.P.No.223253/2020 (Gm-Res) C/W W.P.No.223254/2020 (Gm-Res), W.P.No.223255/2020 (Gm-Res), W.P.No.223256/2020 (Gm-Res) Between: M/S. M.B.Patil Constructions Ltd., Having Corporate Office At 2Nd Floor, Commercial Building No.1, Opp. Income Tax Building, Shankarsheth Road, Swaragate, Pune - 411 042, Maharashtra State. Rep. By Sri M.S.Mallikarjuna By His Gpa Holder, Sri Dhanaji Venkatrao Patil, Aged About 43 Years, Occ: Business, R/O Plot No.10, Konark Aditya Block, Golibar Maidan Chowk, Camp Pune - 411 001. …Petitioner

condone the delay beyond thirty days having regard to the word used in the proviso to Section 34(3) of the Act, ‘but not thereafter’. (c) If a request is made under Section 33 of the Act, 1996 before the Tribunal, then the limitation under Section 34(3) for filing an application under Section 34 would commence from the date

DR(SMT) SUJATHA RAMESH vs. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

Bench: The Hon'Ble Dr.Justice Vineet Kothari

condonation of delay. This court was pleased to observe as under (page 228 of 323 ITR): “The phrase ‘genuine hardship’ used in section 119 (2)(b) should have been construed liberally even when the petitioner has complied with all the conditions mentioned in Circular dated October 12

M/S N.M.D.C vs. THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING

Bench: R-1.

Section 154 of the Act”. 12. This court has carefully gone through the aforesaid judgment. However, again it was the case under the Income Tax Act. No outer limit in respect of limitation was provided under the statute as provided under the CGST Act. There cannot be condonation of delay

SRI. DEVENDRA PAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav Writ Petition No. 52305/2018 (T-It) Between: Sri. Devendra Pai S/O. Late Narasimha Pai No. 1012, "Udaya", 2Nd Cross, Vivekananda Circle, Mysore - 23. … Petitioner (By Sri. S. Shankar, Senior Advocate As Amicus Curiae Sri. S. Parthasarathi, Advocate) And: 1. The Assistant Commissioner Of

condone the delay in filing the 2 same before him and grant exemption under Section 10(10C) of the Act as prayed for by petitioner vide Annexure-F. This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing in 'B' group this day, the Court, made the following: ORDER At the hearing of the petition, the Court felt that the equity

ARECANUT PROCESSING AND SALE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, these petitions are allowed

Bench: Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ram Mohan Reddy

12. Thus, what was left to be considered by the Commissioner of Income Tax was condonation of delay insofar as it relates to the returns filed for the assessment years 1999-2000 and 2000-01. The explanation offered by the petitioner for the delay from 24.8.2002 the date of order in W.P.Nos.38165- 171/2009 affirming the first audit report

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/s KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income tax Act has been amended to provide that in a case where a trust or institution has been granted registration under section 12AA - 10 - of the Income tax Act, the benefit

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income tax Act has been amended to provide that in a case where a trust or institution has been granted registration under section 12AA - 10 - of the Income tax Act, the benefit

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income tax Act has been amended to provide that in a case where a trust or institution has been granted registration under section 12AA - 10 - of the Income tax Act, the benefit

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income tax Act has been amended to provide that in a case where a trust or institution has been granted registration under section 12AA - 10 - of the Income tax Act, the benefit

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income tax Act has been amended to provide that in a case where a trust or institution has been granted registration under section 12AA - 10 - of the Income tax Act, the benefit

KAMALSAB S/O. DAWOODSAB SAVANUR vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar Writ Petition No. 79811 Of 2013(Lr) Between Sri. Kamalsab S/O. Dawoodsab Savanur Age: 51 Years, Occ: Agriculture R/O. Kotigeri Oni, Hangal, Dist:Haveri. ... Petitioner (By Sri. D L Ladkhan, Advocate) & 1. The State Of Karnataka R/By Secretary Department Of Revenue M.S. Building, Bengaluru 2. The Land Tribunal, Hangal R/By Its Secretary Tq:Hangal, Dist: Haveri 3. Sri. Ramachandra Hemajippa Sugandhi Since Deceased By His Lrs 3A. Smt. Sunanda W/O. Krishna Sugandhi Age: Major, Occ: Household Work R/O. Bazar Galli, Near Chavadi Hangal, Dist: Haveri

condoned or the defence of delay is to be accepted. The relief under Article 226 should be refused in the following cases. i) MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. BALWANT REGULAR MOTOR SERVICE, AMRAVATI AND OTHERS (AIR 1969 SC 329), “11. In any event xxx permits. In these circumstances we consider that there was such acquiescence in the R.T.A