Held, that the application for revision had been filed on the ground that certain subsidies received by the assessee were erroneously treated as revenue receipts instead of capital receipts. After the receipt of the order of the Tribunal for the Assessment year 2012-13, the petitioner filed Revision application on July 1, 2019, within five months from the date of receipt of the order of the Tribunal and the time limit for filing revision application was expired on January 16, 2018..Commissioner has not condoned the delay and dismissed the petition. On writ the Court held that power should be exercised in a liberal manner and delay should have been condoned where. Accordingly the order dated March 20, 2020 passed by the Commissioner under section 264 of the Act is quashed and set aside. Commissioner is directed to (AY. 2015-16)
Jindal Worldwide Ltd v. PCIT (2024) 466 ITR 672 (Guj)(HC)
S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Subsidy-Erroneously treated as revenue-Return was processed under section 143(1)-Revision application was rejected without condoning the delay-Power should be exercised in a liberal manner-Delay should be condoned where there is sufficient cause for it.[S. 264(3), Art. 226]