K.V.THANKA V. UNION OF INDIA

WP(C)/18191/2016

AI Insights

The case involves K.V. Thanka, the petitioner, who challenged the decision of the income tax authorities (respondents) to dismiss his application for condonation of delay in filing his income tax return for the assessment year 2011-12. The delay was attributed to the petitioner's prolonged illness. The initial rejection (Ext.P7) was based on the grounds that the conditions for condonation as per the Board's instructions were not satisfied. The petitioner provided various documents (Ext.P9 series) to substantiate his claim of illness. The court found that the matter required fresh consideration as it involved the substantial right of the petitioner.

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 742157 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 25-05-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Board's instruction No.13/2006, Board's instruction No.9 of 2015
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K M V PANDALAI
• Assessee Lawyers: JOHN PAUL
• Keywords: Assessment Year 2011-12; Condonation of delay; Income Tax Return; Prolonged Illness
• Section: 1562/80; 27.2.2015; 20.7.2015; 22.9.2015; 8.9.2015; 9.6.2015; 15.12.2015

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2016/4TH JYAISHTA, 1938 WP(C).No. 18191 of 2016 (Y) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- K.V.THANKA, KALIYAMPURATHU HOUSE, PIRAVOM P.O, ERNAKULAM-686664 BY ADV. SRI.JOHN T.PAUL RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI- 110 001 2. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, OFFICE OF THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOCHI-2 CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682018 3. THE JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALUVA RANGE, KAP COMPLEX, RS ROAD, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DT, PIN-683101 4. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, MAHIMA TOWERS, TEMPLE BY-PASS ROAD, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DT-685554 BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 18191 of 2016 (Y) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXHIBIT P1:- THE TRUE COPY THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER NO.1562/80 DATED 22.9.1980 EXHIBIT P2:- THE TRUE COPY THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 27.2.2015 EXHIBIT P3:- THE TRUE COPY THE APPLICATION BY THE PETITIONER DATED 27.2.2015 EXHIBIT P4:- THE TRUE COPY THE LETTER NO. PAN: ABPPT9874R/W- 2/TDPA/2015-16 DATED 20.7.2015 EXHIBIT P5:- THE TRUE COPY THE PROFORMA REPORT NO.WD.2/TDPA/CD- 03/15-16 DATED 22.9.2015 EXHIBIT P6:- THE TRUE COPY THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT LETTER NO.F.NO. 7/ADDL CIIT/ALV/2015-16 DATED 8.9.2015 EXHIBIT P7:- THE TRUE COPY THE REJECTION LETTER NO. CIT- II/CHN/TECH/CD-127/2015-16 DATED 22.9.2015 EXHIBIT P8:- THE TRUE COPY OF BOARD CIRCULAR 9/2015 DATED 9.6.2015 EXHIBIT P9:- THE TRUE COPY THE APPLICATION BY THE PETITIONER DATED 15.12.2015 ALONG WITH ENCLOSURES RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //True copy// P.A. to Judge ds A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 18191 of 2016 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25th day of May, 2016 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P7, an order passed by the second respondent dismissing the application to condone delay in filing the return of income for the assessment year 2011-12. The reason stated in Ext.P7 is as under: “The reason for delay in filing the return of income is stated that the assessee could not file the return in time due to prolonged illness and treatment thereof. The conditions stipulated vide Board's instruction No.13/2006 dated 22.12.2006 & 9 of 2015 are not seen satisfied in this case.” 2. Ext.P8 is the circular No.9/2015. 3. The learned counsel submits that the documents relating to the illness of the petitioner was given W.P.(C) No. 18191 of 2016 -2- to the assessing officer along with Ext.P5 to recommend the condonation of delay. However, the Commissioner had taken a different view. The petitioner also has produced Ext.P9 series to indicate that the reason stated regarding his illness was genuine. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned standing counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 to 4. 5. Insofar as the petitioner relies upon certain documents, namely Ext.P9 series, to indicate that he was not keeping well, which resulted in the delay in filing return. I am of the view that the matter requires to be considered afresh as substantial right of the petitioner is involved in the matter. Unless there is any specific reason to deny condonation of delay, under normal circumstances, opportunity should be granted to file the return and consider the same in accordance with law. W.P.(C) No. 18191 of 2016 -3- 6. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of as under: (1) Ext.P7 is set aside. (2) The second respondent shall consider the request for condonation of delay taking into consideration Ext.P9 series and pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner also. sd/- A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE ds "