ST. KURIAKOSE PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION),

WP(C)/9233/2025

AI Insights

The case involves St. Kuriakose Public School Society, a charitable trust, which challenged the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) that dismissed their application for condonation of delay in filing an audit report for the assessment year 2021-2022. The trust filed the audit report 26 days late due to inadvertent reasons related to the Covid-19 pandemic. The Commissioner dismissed the application without specific reasons, leading to the trust's appeal in the High Court. The court criticized the Commissioner's rigid stance and lack of specific reasoning, noting the exceptional circumstances of the pandemic and the minimal delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 746849 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 04-04-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Re Cognizance for Extension of Limitation (2021 (5) KLT 689)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: JOSEPH MARKOS; ALEXANDER MARKOS; V MARKOS; ISAAC THOMAS; P G CHANDAPILLAI; ABRAHAM VITHAYATHIL; NABEEL S
• Keywords: Audit report; Charitable Trust; Condonation of delay; Covid-19; Income Tax
• Section: 12A; 119(2)

Judgement Text

" WP(C) NO. 9233 OF 2025 1 2025:KER:29040 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 9233 OF 2025 PETITIONER(S): ST. KURIAKOSE PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY PAZHUTHURUTHY THIRUVAMPADY, KOTTAYAM PAN - AAXAS9585Q REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY AJEESH JOSE, PIN – 686 612. BY ADVS. SRI.JOSEPH MARKOS (SR.) ALEXANDER JOSEPH MARKOS V.ABRAHAM MARKOS ISAAC THOMAS P.G.CHANDAPILLAI ABRAHAM JOHN VITHAYATHIL NABEEL AHAMED S. RESPONDENT(S): 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), AYAKAR BHAVAN, OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOCHI, PIN – 682 018. 2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) INCOME TAX OFFICE, KOTTAYAM, PIN – 686 001. 3 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, RAVI AGARWAL SRI.JOSE JOSEPH SR.SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 9233 OF 2025 2 2025:KER:29040 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. ......…............................................. W.P.(C) No.9233 of 2025 …................................................ Dated this the 4th day of April, 2025 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges an order issued under Section 119(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for short, ‘the Act’], dismissing an application for condonation of delay in filing audit report in Form 10B for the assessment year 2021-2022. 2. Petitioner is a charitable trust registered under Section 12A of Act and is liable to file their returns as well as audit reports for each assessment year. In the assessment year 2021-2022, the audit reports were filed with a delay of 26 days. However, the return, as required by law, was filed within time. Since there was a delay in filing the audit report, an application was filed before the Commissioner under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act for condonation. However, by order dated 08.04.2024, the application was dismissed. 3. According to the petitioner, the delay in filing the audit report was inadvertent and it was during the Covid-19 Pandemic time, when the Supreme Court had even condoned delay in most of the matters. It is also pointed out the Commissioner has taken a very rigid stance, instead of adopting a liberal approach. WP(C) NO. 9233 OF 2025 3 2025:KER:29040 4. I have heard Sri.Joseph Markos, the learned Senior counsel instruction by Sri.Alexander Joseph Markos, the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents. 5. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that no specific reasons have been given by the Commissioner and instead, he merely came to the conclusion that the petitioner had failed to provide any reasons or documentary evidence to prove that the delay was caused due to circumstances beyond petitioner’s control. The approach of the Commissioner has been highly hyper-technical and contrary to the well established principles on condonation of delay. 6. The requirement of audit report to be filed one month before filing the returns have been brought in by an amendment only recently. Till then, the audit reports could be filed along with the returns. In the instant case, the delay in filing the audit report occurred at a time when Covid-19 Pandemic had struck the country. 7. The supreme Court had, in Re Cognizance for Extension of Limitation (2021 (5) KLT 689) suo motu, extended the time for filing various applications in judicial and quasi judicial proceedings. Though the respondents have objects to the applicability of the said judgment, to the filing of an audit report, I am of the view that principles embodied in the said judgment of the Supreme Court could be adopted, especially since the delay in filing audit report is only 26 days. In this context, it is also pertinent to mention that the CBDT had extended the time to file returns till 15.03.2022, and therefore, petitioner should have filed the WP(C) NO. 9233 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:29040 audit report 30 days before the returns. Since the change in dates has caused confusion to many persons and the delay is very minimal, I am of the view that a rigid stance ought not to have been adopted. The order declining to condone the delay is liable to be interfered with. 8. Accordingly, Ext.P8 order is set aside and the delay in filing the audit report for the assessment year 2021-2022 is hereby condoned. The writ petition is allowed as above. sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AMV/04/04/2025 WP(C) NO. 9233 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:29040 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9233/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 06.08.2024 IN W.P.(C) NO. 10438/2024. AND CONNECTED CASES EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.1/2022 DATED 11.01.2022 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES (CBDT) EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 13.03.2022 AND AUDIT REPORT IN FORM 10B EXHIBIT P3(A) TRUE COPY OF INCOME TAX RETURN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 15.03.2022 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 10.01.2022 OF THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO. 2/2020 DATED 03.01.2020 ISSUED BY CBDT EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO. 16/2022 DATED 19.07.2022 ISSUED BY CBDT EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY DATED 01.08.2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. ITBA/COM/F/17/2024- 25/1063905768(1) DATED 04.04.2024 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT "