M/S. Royal Led Equipments Pvt. Ltd vs Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax , ... on 11 March, 2025

[Cites 24, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

M/S. Royal Led Equipments Pvt. Ltd vs Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax , ... on 11 March, 2025

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Darshan B. Gandhi for the Petitioner and learned advocate Mr. Rudram Trivedi appearing on behalf of learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Nikunt K. Raval for the Respondents.

Page 1 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined

2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr. Rudram Trivedi waives service of the notice of the rule on behalf of the Respondents. With the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for hearing, as the issue involved is very short.

3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

3.1 The Petitioner is a registered company, inter alia, engaged in the business of manufacturing LED contour linear solutions and advanced technology. The Petitioner-Assessing Company filed its return of income on 28.10.2021, for the Assessment Year 2021-22, under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ( for short "the Act").

3.2 The Petitioner availed the benefits of lower tax rate under Section 115BAB of the Act. The Petitioner made numerous attempts to fill Form 10-ID under Section 115BAB read with 23AF of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, however, it could not file its Form-10-ID within the prescribed time limit under Section 139(1) of the Act, on Page 2 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined 07.11.2021.The Petitioner's consultant made a tweet on Twitter.com and tweeted that the income tax portal was not working efficiently, and he was unable to file the Form 10-ID for the companies.

3.3 While processing the return of the Petitioner company, the Central Processing Centre (CPC) Authority admitted that the Petitioner had opted for the benefits of provisions of the Section 115BAB of the Act.

3.4 Meanwhile, the Central Board of Direct Taxes ('CBDT') noticed that, while claiming the benefits of lower tax rates for the Assessment Year 2021-22, the assessees were facing difficulties in filing such forms. Accordingly, the CBDT issued Circular No. 06 of 2022, dated 17.03.2022 providing a standing instruction to condone the delay that occurred to the assessee in filing of the Form 10-ID under the provisions of Section 115BAB of the Act.

3.5 Eventually, on 12.09.2022, the Petitioner-Company was able to file Form 10-ID on the online portal for the Assessment Year 2021-22. Thereafter, on 12.09.2022, the Petitioner-Company filed its Page 3 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined returns of income for the Assessment Year 2022-23 and 2023-24 and claimed the benefits of the special tax rates of Section 115BAB of the Act. For Assessment Year 2022-23, as there was no income chargeable to tax, the Petitioner-Company was not impacted.

However, for the return of income for the Assessment Year 2023-24, there was taxable income under Section 143(1) of the Act, the CPC-

Authority did not grant the benefits of Section 115BAB of the Act.

3.6 On receipt of the intimation order under Section 143(1) of the Act on 22.12.2023, the Petitioner came to know that the benefits of provisions of Section 115BAB were not granted to the Petitioner-

Company.

3.7. On 12.01.2024, the Petitioner-Company filed an application under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act to condone the delay that occurred in filing Form 10-ID for the Assessment year 2021-22.

3.8. Upon filing of the aforesaid application by the Petitioner-

Company, Respondent No. 1 called for the report and comments of the Jurisdiction Assessing Officer i.e., Respondent No. 3, as well as Page 4 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined its Range Head.

3.9. Upon receiving the report/comments from the Assessing Officer and Range Head of the Petitioner-Company, Respondent No. 1 passed an order dated 26.06.2024 rejecting the application of the Petitioner-Company.

4. Aggrieved by the order of the Respondent No.1 dated 26.06.2024, present petition is filed with the following prayers:-

"A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus or a writ in the nature of Certiorarified Mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or directions

(i) quashing and setting aside the impugned order passed by the respondent no.01 under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act on 26.06.2024 at Annexure - G and further, (ii) Direction, directing both the respondent authorities to accept the Form 10-ID filed under section 115BAB read with Rule 21AF of the rules on 12.09.2022 as legal and valid;

(B) During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the respondent no.03 to accept the Form 10-ID filed for A.Y. 2021-22 on 12.09.2022;

(C) Pass any such other and/or further orders that may be thought just and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the present case."

5. Mr.Darshan B.Gandhi, learned advocate on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that there was genuine hardship in terms of Page 5 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined technical difficulty and glitches in the income tax portal while filing Form 10-ID before the due date and therefore, the same could not be filed in time. He further submitted that the Petitioner had claimed the benefit of special rate of tax in Form 6 in its Income Tax Return.

Further, the consultant of the Petitioner-Company tweeted about the difficulty in filing Form 10-ID contemporaneously on 07.11.2021, which is admitted by the CBDT in terms of issuance of Circular No.6 of 2022 and Circular No.19 of 2023 and therefore, the benefit of the special rate of tax claimed by the Petitioner-Company in its return cannot be denied on mere technicalities and therefore, this is a fit case to condone the delay (if any), in filing Form 10-ID under section 119 (2)(b) of the Act. Mr. Gandhi, further relied upon the following judgments :-

1. V.M.Procon Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ADIT, [Special Civil Application No. 9707 of 2024].

2. CIT Vs. Xavier Kelavani Mandal (P.) Ltd. reported in [2014] 41 taxmann.com 184.

3. CIT Vs. Rai Bahadur Bissesswarlal Motilal Malwasie Trust reported in [1992] 65 taxmann 273.

4. Association of Indian Panelboard Manufacturer Vs. DCIT reported in [2023] 157 taxmann.com 550.

Page 6 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined

5. Surat Smart City Development Limited Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat-1 & Anr.[Special Civil Application No. 10397 of 2024.

5.1 Relying on the aforesaid decisions, Mr. Gandhi, learned advocate submitted that when the petitioner is eligible for the substantive benefit under the Act, mere procedural inadequacy may not stand in the way to deny such benefit.

6. On the other-hand, Mr.Rudram Trivedi on behalf of Mr. Nikunt Raval, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondent-authorities, very fairly submitted that, recently the CBDT by Circular No.17 of 2024 dated 18 th November, 2024 has issued directions for exercise of powers under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, wherein, the following have been stipulated :

F.No.173/32/2022-ITA-I Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Direct Taxes New Delhi, the 18 November, 2014 Sub: Candonation of delay under section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in fling of Form No. 10-IC or Form No. 10-ID for Assessment Years 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23-Reg.

Page 7 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined In exercise of the powers condenmed under section 119(2)

(b) of the Income-in Act, 1961 (the Act), the Central Board of Direct Taxes ('CBDT) by Circular No. 6/2002 dated 17.03.2022 and Circular No. 19/2023 dated 23.10.2023 condoned the delay in fling of Form No. 10-IC as per Rule 21AE of the Income tax Rules, 1962 ('the Rules") for Assessment Years 2020-21 and 2021-22 in cases where the conditions mentioned in the said Circulars are satisfied.

2 Representations have been received by the CBDT stating that Form No. 10-IC or Form No. 10-ID could not be filed for various assessment years on or before the due date or extended due date, as the case may be. It has been requested that the delay in filing of these Forms for respective assessment years may be condoned.

3. With a view to avoid genuine hardship to the assessees in exercising the option, under section 115BAA of the Act read with Rule 21AE of the Rules or under section 115BAB of the Act read with Rule 21AF of the Rules, the CBDT in exercise of the powers conferred under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, hereby authorizes:-

a) the Pr.Commissioners of Income Tax ('Pr. CsIT')/ Commissioners of Income Tax ("CsIT") to admit and deal with the applications for condonation of delay in filing of Form No. 10-IC or Form No. 10-ID for Assessment Years 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23 where there is a delay of upto 365 days.

b) the Pr. Chief Commissioners of Income Tax ('Pr. CcsIT)/ Chief Commissioners of Income Tax ('CCsIT)/ Directors General of Income Tax ('DsGIT) to admit and deal with the applications for condonation of delay in filing of Form No. 10-IC or Form No. 10-

ID for Assessment Years 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23 where there is a delay of more than 365 days.

4. The Pr. CCsIT/ CCsIT/ DsGIT/ Pr. CsIT/ CsIT while deciding such applications for condonation of delay in furnishing of Form No. 10-IC or Form No. 10-ID to exercise the option, under section 115BAA of the Act read with Rule 21AE of the Rules or under section 115BAB of the Act read with Rule 21AF of the Rules, shall satisfy themselves that the applicant's case is a fit case for condonation under the existing provisions of the Act. The Pr.

Page 8 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined CCSIT/CCsIT/DSGIT/Pr. CsIT/CsIT shall ensure that the following conditions are satisfied, while deciding such applications:-

(1) The return of income for relevant assessment year has been filed on or before the due date specified under section 139(1) of the Act;

(ii) The assessee has opted for taxation, u/s 115BAA of the Act in case condonation of delay is for Form No. 10-IC and u/s 115BAB of the Act in case condonation of delay is for Form No. 10-ID, in "Filing Status" in "Part A-GEN" of the Form of Return of Income ITR-6; and

(iii) The assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing such Form before the expiry of the time allowed and the case is of genuine hardship on merits.

5. No application for condonation of delay in filing of Form No. 10-IC or Form No. 10-ID shall be entertained beyond three years from the end of the assessment year for which such application is made. The time limit for filing of such application within three years from the end of the assessment year will be applicable for application filed on or after the date of issue of this Circular. A condonation application should be disposed of, as far as possible, within six months from the end of the month in which such application is received by the Competent Authority.

6. The delegation of powers, as per para 3 of this Circular shall cover all such applications for condonation of delay under section 119(2)(b) of the Act which are pending as on date of issue of this Circular."

7. Unfortunately, according to Mr.Trivedi, in terms of the Clause 6 of the Circular No.17 of 2024 hereinabove, the said Circular will be applicable only to applications for condonation of delay as may be "pending" on the date of issuance of the said Circular. Since, the Page 9 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined petitioner's application under Section 119(2)(b) came to be dismissed on 26.06.2024, the Respondent-authorities were powerless to do anything.

8. DISCUSSION & FINDINGS:-

8.1 In the decision of this Court in the case of V.M.Procon Pvt.

Ltd. (Supra), this Court held as under:-

"25. Considering the above facts, respondent No.2 ought to have condoned the delay in filing Form 10-IC by the petitioner instead of rejecting the review application filed by the petitioner on technical ground as in substance, the petitioner has exercised the option for lower rate of tax under section 115BAA of the Act which is clear from the computation of income available on record. Even in Form ITR-6, the petitioner has filled in the details by computing the tax as provision for current tax in Column 54 at Rs.49,58,000/- by applying lower rate of tax meaning thereby, the petitioner has exercised option merely because in absence of any provision for exercising the option in Column (e) as per the Circular No. 19/2023, the petitioner cannot be deprived of lower rate of tax and the delay in filing Form 10-IC ought to have been condoned by respondent No.2 so as to fulfill the condition prescribed in subsection (5) of section 115BAA of the Act read with section 21AE of the Rules providing for procedure for filing Form 10-IC.

26. In view of the foregoing reasons, the impugned order dated 13.10.2023 passed under section 119(3)(b) of the Act and intimation under section 143(1) of the Act dated 13.11.2022 are hereby quashed and set aside and the mater is remanded back to the respondent No.2 to pass appropriate Page 10 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined order condoning delay in filing Form 10-IC by the petitioner for exercising the option of lower rate of tax under section 115BAA of the Act as per the return of income filed by the petitioner in Form of Return of Income i.e. ITR-6 so as to enable the Assessing Officer or the Central Processing Center (CPC) to reprocess the Return of Income filed by the petitioner applying provision of section 115BAA of the Act for lower rate of tax at 22% instead of regular rate of tax applicable to the domestic company. Such exercise shall be completed within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order by the respondent No.2."

8.2 In the case of Xavier Kelavani Mandal (Supra), this Court discussed the scope of accepting the audit report in Form 10B from the Assessee which was not filed during the course of the assessment proceedings seeking exemption under section 11 of the Act. This Court considering various decisions, justified the filing of the audit report at a later point of time.

8.3 In the case of Bissesswarlal (Supra), the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court held that the assessee must be held to be permitted to be filed Form 10B as required under Section 12A at a later point of time though not filed along with the return of income.

8.4 In the case of Surat Smart City Development Ltd. (Supra), it Page 11 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined was held as under :-

"13. On perusal of the above circular, it appears that on receipt of the representation, the CBDT has exercised the powers under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act to avoid the genuine hardships to the domestic companies in exercise of the option under Section 115BAA of the Act on fulfilling the above three conditions. The petitioner, however, could not file the Form electronically on or before 30th June, 2022 because the petitioner had already filed the Form 10IC for the Assessment Year 2021-2022 so as to see that the petitioner at least gets the benefit of the reduced rate of tax for the said Assessment Year. The petitioner, however, was entitled to file the Form as per the aforesaid Circular but the petitioner has not filed the Form 10IC for the Assessment Year 2021-2022. The petitioner therefore had no option but to make an application under Section 119(2)(b) to treat the Form 10IC filed for Assessment Year 2021-2022 as if the same is filed for Assessment Year 2021 as per the aforesaid Circular.

14. It is true that the petitioner could not have made such a prayer of treating Form 10IC filed for Assessment Year 2021-2022 for Assessment Year 2021. The petitioner ought to have prayed for permission to file the Form 10IC for the year 2021 as per the Circular No.6 of 2022 under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act by treating the Form 10IC filed for subsequent year 2021-2022 as null and void as the petitioner had already opted for a reduced rate of tax for Assessment Year 2021 in the return of income which was permitted to be regularised by condoning the delay in filing Form 10IC as per Rule 21AE of the Rules by the CBDT by issuing the aforesaid Circular for Assessment Year 2021.

15. The contention raised on behalf of the respondent that in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Wipro Limited (Supra), the petitioner is not entitled to file Form 10IC belatedly after the filing of the return under Section 139(1) of the Act is concerned, the said aspect is taken into consideration by this Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax versus Gujarat Energy Developement Agency by considering the decison of the Wipro Limited (Supra) vis-a-vis the filing of Form 10B to claim the exumption under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act as under :

Page 12 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined "5. Reliance placed by the learned advocate for the appellant on the decision of M/s.Wipro Limited (supra) would not be applicable in the facts of the case, as in the facts of the present case, the assessee has claimed the exemption under Section 11 read with Section 12A(1)(b) of the Act which required the assessee to file audit report in Form of 10B which has nothing to do with claiming 100% exemption of total income in respect of newly established 100% Export Oriented Undertakings under Section 10B.

Section 10B(8) requires the assessee to file an undertaking before the due date of furnishing of return of income under sub-section (1) of Section 139 before the Assessing Officer in writing that the provision of Section 10B may not be made applicable to him, otherwise the provision of this Section shall not apply to him for any of the relevant assessment year.

6. Considering the language of the provision of Section 10B(8) of the Act, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that it was mandatory on part of the assessee to file declaration before the due date of filing of return under sub-section (1) of Section 139 of the Act, whereas in the facts of the said case the assessee filed such undertaking along with the revised return under sub-section (5) of Section 139 of the Act and in such facts the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the twin conditions prescribed under Section 10B(8) of the Act was mandatory to be fulfilled and it cannot be said that though the declaration is mandatory, the filing of such declaration within the due date of filing of return under sub- section (1) of Section 139 would be directory.

7. Reference to the aforesaid decision has no connection whatsoever remotely to the facts of the present case and therefore, in the facts of the present case, the Tribunal has rightly followed the decision of this Court in case of Sarvodaya Charitable Trust v. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) in Special Civil Application No.6097 of 2020 decided on 09th December, 2020 as well as the decision in case of Social Security Scheme of GICEA (supra) to uphold the decision of the CIT (Appeals), wherein this Court has Page 13 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined held that the approach of the authority in such type of cases should be equitable, balancing and judicious and respondent No.2 might be justified in denying the exemption under Section 11 of the Act being a technical in nature by rejecting such application. But, in the facts of the case, when the assessee has already uploaded the audit report in Form 10B as required under Section 10(23)C read with Section 12A(1)(b) of the Act before the Assessing Officer prior to the original asessment order under Section 143(3) passed on 06th April, 2021."

16. Learned advocate Mr.Manish Shah for the petitioner also invited the attention of the Court to paragraph No.10 of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Wipro Limited (Supra) wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under :

"10. Even the submission on behalf of the assessee that it was not necessary to exercise the option under section 10B (8) of the IT Act and even without filing the revised return of income, the assessee could have submitted the declaration in writing to the assessing officer during the assessment proceedings has no substance and the same cannot be accepted. Even the submission made on behalf of the assessee that filing of the declaration subsequently and may be during the assessment proceedings would have made no difference also has no substance. The significance of filing a declaration under section 10B (8) can be said to be co-

terminus with filing of a return under section 139(1), as a check has been put in place by virtue of section 10B (5) to verify the correctness of claim of deduction at the time of filing the return. If an assessee claims an exemption under the Act by virtue of Section 10B, then the correctness of claim has already been verified under section 10B(5). Therefore, if the claim is withdrawn post the date of filing of return, the accountant's report under section 10B(5) would become falsified and would stand to be nullified."

17. On perusal of the above observation of the Hon'ble Apex Court, it is also apperant that the Hon'ble Apex Court has considered the significance of filing declaration under Section 10B(8) of the Act considering the provisons of Section 10B(5) of Page 14 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined the Act being a check to verify the correctness of the claim of deduction at the time of filing of return so that if an assessee claims an exumption under the Act by virtue of Section 10B of the Act, then the correctness of the claim has already been verified under Sub-section (5) of Section 10B and therefore, if the claim is withdrawn post the date of filing of return, the report of the Accountant filed under Section 10B(5) of the Act would become falsified and would stand to be nullified. However, the provisions of Section 115BAA of the Act are in a way granting relief to the assessee-Companies to enable them to pay the reduced rate of tax at rate of 22% on exercise of the option on the various conditions mentioned therein.

18. In such circumstances, the respondent No.1 was required to consider the facts of the case by permitting the petitioner to file a fresh Form 10IC and condoning the delay in filing such Form by molding the prayer made by the petitioner to treat the Form 10IC filed by the petitioner for Assessment Year 2021-2022 to be treated as that of for Assessment Year 2021. The provisions of Section 119(2)(b) of the Act are meant for redressal of the grievance and hardships caused to the petitioner as held by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in case of R. Seshammal (Supra) as under :

"This is hardly the manner in which the State is expected to deal with the citizens, who under anxiety to comly with all the requiremnts of the Act pay monies as advance tax to the State, even though the monies were not actually required to be paid by them and thereafter seek refund of the monies so paid by mistake after the proceedings under the Act are dropped by the authorities concerned. The State is not entitled to plead the hypertechnical plea of limitation in such a situation to avoid return of the amounts. Section 119 of the Act vests ample power in the Board to render justice in such a situation. The Board has acted arbitrarily in rejecting the petitioner's request for refund."

19. Considering the above facts as well as the settled legal position, the petition succeeds and accordingly allowed. The petitioner is permitted to obtain Form 10IC for Assessment Year 2021 in the facts of the case and after obtaining such Form, the petitioner shall make a fresh Application to condone the delay for Page 15 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined the same and the respondent No.1 is directed to consider such Application in light of the observations made in this Order within a period of twelve weeks from the date of filing of such Application by the petitioner. Rule is made absolute. No orders as to cost.

9. Several decisions referred to hereinabove categorically go to show that once a benefit is claimed in the return of income, the filing of a separate Form pursuant to the claim of the said benefit is merely procedural in nature and should not be denied particularly if the Assessee has been able to show sufficient cause for the lapse. In the present case, the very fact that a series of Circulars namely Circular Nos.6/2022, 19/2023 and recently 17/2024 have been issued by the CBDT goes to show that there has been a problem in large number of cases which the Assessee has faced in respect of filing Form 10- IC and 10-ID in time. Given the acknowledgment of the problem by the Department, it must be said that the Assessee has shown sufficient cause. Further, had the application of the Assessee under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act not been dismissed and per chance, had remained pending as on 18.11.2024, the case of the Assessee for condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act would have been squarely covered by Circular No.17 of 2024 and the Respondent-authorities, following the said Circular would have Page 16 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/14786/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 11/03/2025 undefined automatically condoned the delay in the Petitioner's case. In such situation, this Court deems it appropriate to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 26.06.2024 passed by the Respondent No.1 under Section 119(2)(b) and further direct the Respondent-

authorities to accept Form 10-ID filed under Section 115BAB of the Act read with Rule 21AF of the Rules, filed on 12.09.2022 to be legal and valid. The petition therefore succeeds. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs.

(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) (D.N.RAY,J) BINA SHAH Page 17 of 17 Uploaded by BINA SHAH(HC00353) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 21 23:37:37 IST 2025

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court