Due to change in the share holdings and prolonged litigation, return for the AY. 2014-15 was filed beyond prescribed date under the Act. Petition was filed before the CBDT u/s. 119 (2) (b) of the Act to condone the delay. CBDT rejected the petition. On writ allowing the petition the Court held that thegenuine hardship, should be construed liberally. The Court also observed that order of CBDT being cryptic the delay was condoned. The order of the CBDT was quashed. Followed B.M Malani v CIT (2008) 219 CTR 313/ 13 DTR 186 (SC) / 10 SCC 617. (AY. 2014-15)
Vasudev AdigasFast Foods Pvt. Ltd. v. CBDT (2020) 186 DTR 89 / 314 CTR 852 (Karn.)(HC) Editorial : Affirmed by division Bench , Vasudev Adigas Fast Food (P) Ltd; CBDT v. (2021) 437 ITR 67 / 282 Taxman 48/ 323 CTR 235 (Karn) (HC)
S. 119 : Central Board of Direct Taxes-Return-Condonation of delay-Genuine hardship–Should be construed liberally-Order being cryptic-Delay is condoned. [S.119 (2)(b), 139. Art. 226, 227]