Court: | High Court of Kerala |
Head Notes: | W.P. (C) No. 37648 of 2023 Facts of the case Writ petition was filed challenging the order passed by Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under section 119(2)(b) of Income-tax Act, 1961 wherein the application of the assessee for condonation of delay of one day in filing return of income for A.Y. 2021-22 was rejected. Contentions of the assessee The assessee submits that the Act does not give power to Principal Chief Commissioner/Principal Commissioner of Income Tax to consider the merits of the claim of income, loss etc. In the impugned order passed under section 119(2)(b), PCIT has not delineated the grounds for condoning the delay but has rejected the application considering the merits of the claim. Analysis of legal provisions by the Court On a perusal of section 119(2)(b), it is evident that the said section only empowers CBDT to admit an application or claim for exemption, deduction, refund or any other relief under the Act after the expiry of the period specified by or under the Act for making such application or claim and deal with the same on merits in accordance with law. A Division Bench of this Court had an occasion to consider the provisions of Section 119(2)(b) and said circular in the case of Daisy vs. PCIT W.A. No. 1420/2023 wherein the Court was of the opinion that the Circular empowers the PCCIT/PCIT to consider the merits of the refund claim while exercising the delegated powers under section 119(2)(b) which would amount to circumvent of Section 119(2)(b). Decision PCCIT/PCIT has no power to consider the merits of the refund application and what is required to be considered is the merits of the application for condonation of delay only. |
Law: | Income-Tax Act |
Section(s): | Section 119(2)(b) |
Counsel(s): | HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON R.SREEJITH K.KRISHNA PARVATHY MENON |
Dowload Pdf File | Click here to download the file in pdf format |
Uploaded By | Adv. Priyanshi Desai |
Date of upload: | December 4, 2023 |
Leave a Reply