The Rajasthan High Court In a writ petition filed by a senior citizen seeking condonation of delay in filing Income Tax Returns ( ITR ), condoned the delay stating the real hurdle performed via the taxpayer who is a senior citizen.
The taxpayer, Padam Raj Bhandari, is an insurance surveyor and senior citizen who filed an application on May 12, 2016, asking for the condonation of delay under section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to claim an income tax refund for the AY 2009-10 to 2014-15.
The applicant argued that he had suffered real hardship mentally, financially, and physically due to his depression, limited income, and age which in turn directed to the late return filing.
The Income Tax officer and Commissioner of Income Tax, the respondents, on February 27, 2017, rejected the application claiming that there was not sufficient evidence to establish that the taxpayer suffered real challenges.
The applicant’s counsel Mr TC Gupta claimed that the applicant does not face genuine challenges and therefore must be granted the advnage under the cited section and the CBDT Circular dated June 9, 2015.
Read Also: ‘Mens Rea’ is An Essential Element To Establish Delayed ITR Offense
The counsel relied on the precedent law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of B.M. Malani Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr, in which the term `genuine’ was described as “not fake or counterfeit, real, not pretending (not bogus or merely a ruse)\”. This description is applicable and valid in the applicant’s case owing to his old age and financial measures.
The counsel for the respondents Mr. Sunil Bhandari said that the ambit of Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act can be regarded merely when there was a real challenge and that also merely for 6 years which is quoted in CBDT Circular No.09/2015 dated 09.06.2015. Also, the counsel argued that not enough evidence was furnished by the applicant for his depression or illnesses.
After reviewing the evidence and statements presented by both the petitioner and the respondents, the court composed of Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Munnuri Laxman came to the conclusion that, given the economic downturn, the petitioner’s old age, the prolonged duration of the case, and their standing as a small-scale surveyor with no prior issues with revenue collection by the tax authorities, this qualifies as a situation of legitimate distress.
Read Also: Rajasthan HC Upholds Use of IT Section 148A(d) for Inquiry into Suspected Tax Discrepancies
The court ordered the relevant authority to consider the returns and decide on the petitioner’s claim, ensuring they follow the six-year time limit from the applicant’s application set by CBDT Circular No.09/2015 on 09.06.2015.
| Case Title | Padam Raj Bhandari Versus Union of India |
| Citation | D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4252/2017 |
| Date | 01.07.2024 |
| Counsel For Appellant | Mr. T.C. Gupta (through VC). |
| Counsel For Respondent | Mr. Sunil Bhandari |
| Rajasthan High Court | Read Order |
