Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Udit Goyal v. PCIT (2025) 307 Taxman 34 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Return-Delay of 12 days-COVID-19-related constraints-PCIT acts as a quasi-judicial body-Under an obligation to pass a reasoned order-Order was set aside, and the matter was remanded back to PCIT for a de novo consideration to decide the application. [S. 119(2)(b),139(4) Art, 226]

VRG Electronics (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2025) 307 Taxman 109 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 119: Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Form 10-IC-60-day delay-Mistake of accountant-Matter remanded to the file of PCIT for de novo consideration. [S. 115BAA,119(2)(b), 139(1), Form-10-IC, Art. 226]

Balaji Landmarks LLP v. CBDT (2025) 307 Taxman 498 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 119: Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Return for losses-Inadequate advice by a Chartered Accountant admitted by filing an affidavit-Delay was condoned-Order rejecting the application was set aside. [S.80, 119(2)(b) 139, 153(1B) Art. 226]

Manish Popatbhai Jiwani HUF v. CCIT (2025) 307 Taxman 50 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 119: Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Carry forward and set off of business losses-Failure to up load the return within the due date of filing of return-Chartered accountant was busy with family function-Application for condonation of delay was rejected by the CCIT-On writ the Court held that Chief Commissioner could not have rejected application as filing of return for claiming benefit under provision of Act was procedural and benefit accrued to assessee could not be taken away on account of technicalities when there was a genuine hardship. The matter was remanded to the Chief Commissioner to pass a fresh order to condone the delay in filing the return. [S. 44B, 72 139, Art. 226]

Vesava Koli Samaj Shikshan Sanstha v. CIT (E) (2025) 307 Taxman 83 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 119: Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Audit report in Form 10B was obtained in time and uploaded with a delay of 181 days-Mistake of the accountant of the Auditor-Delay was condoned-Order of CIT(E) was quashed and set aside.[S. 11, 12, 119(2)(b),143(1) form No 10B, Art. 226]

St. Thomas High School v. CIT (E) (2025) 307 Taxman 141 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 119: Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Property held for charitable purposes-Form No 10B delayed by 29 days-Delay was condoned, and the revenue was directed to allow exemption. [S. 11, 12A, 119(2)(b), Form No.10B, Art. 226]

Delhi Maharashtriya Educational and Cultural Society v. CIT (E) (2025) 307 Taxman 448 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 119: Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Property held for charitable purposes-Delay of 16 days in uploading the Form No 10B-Mistake of the auditor-Order rejecting the application was set aside. [S.11, 12,12A, 119(2)(b),143(1), 154, Form No 10B, Art. 226 ]

Dinesh Surendra Kotecha v. UOI (2025) 307 Taxman 504 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 119: Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Property held for charitable purposes-Delay of 70 days-Order of CIT(E) not condoning the delay was quashed and set aside-Authority concerned was directed to grant the exemption.[S. 11, 119(2)(b), Form No 10B, Art. 226]

Babubhai C Jariwala Charitable Trust v. CBDT (2025) 307 Taxman 592 (Guj.)(HC)

S. 119: Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Property held for charitable purposes-Form No 10B was not filed along with the return-Mistake of chartered accountant-Delay of 1448 days-High Court condoned the delay and directed the authority concerned to allow the exemption. [S. 11, 12A, 119(2)(b), Form No 10B, Art. 226 ]

Columbia Global Center in India v. ITO (E) (2025) 307 Taxman 548 (Bom.)(HC)

S. 119: Central Board of Direct Taxes-Circular-Property held for charitable purposes-Accumulation of income-Filed after due date of return-Delay of 338 days-Suffer genuine hardship if delay was not condoned, as accumulated amount had already been applied towards objects of trust in relevant assessment year and if exemption in respect of accumulated amount was denied and tax demand arising on account of denial of benefit of accumulation was recovered, it would place assessee in gross financial difficulty, delay in filing Form No. 10 was condoned. [S. 11(2), 11(5),139(1), Form No 10, Art.226]