Technicalities and rigid application of rules should not override human considerations: Court on rejection of application for condonation of Delay in filing Return under section 119(2)(b)

 

The issue in the case of Smita Dilip Ghule vs. The Central Board of Direct Taxes & Others  was with regard to condonation of Delay in filing Return of income vis a vis Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

One may note that the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) is empowered to condone delays if justified by valid and bona fide reasons.

In the present case it was submitted by the assessee that the Personal hardships, including the petitioner losing her father and fulfilling her duties as a doctor during the pandemic, made compliance within the prescribed time difficult.

The court found that the CBDT’s rejection of the application for condonation was mechanical and failed to consider the genuine difficulties and the extraordinary circumstances faced by the petitioner.

The court emphasized that technicalities and rigid application of rules should not override human considerations. It stated that the legislative intent of Section 119(2)(b) is to address such genuine issues.

The court quashed the CBDT’s order refusing condonation.

This case reinforces that the condonation of delay should be handled empathetically, particularly in extraordinary situations like the pandemic. Authorities must weigh genuine hardships over procedural technicalities to uphold justice and fairness in taxation matters.

 

The copy of the order is as under:

1730957878190