Court held that the revised return was rejected under S. 139(5) on a technical ground. The assessee filed a rectification application, on which no orders were passed. Without passing orders on the application for rectification, a demand notice was issued triggering a second application for rectification from the assessee which came to be dismissed. A demand was made on January 31, 2018, the second rectification request was filed by the assessee on February 25, 2018, the second rectification having been dismissed on July 2, 2018, the assessee ultimately filed a petition under S. 264. Therefore, this was not a case where the assessee had not acted in time. The rejection of the application for revision solely on the ground of delay was not justified. CIT is directed to decide on merits. (AY. 2009-10)