- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45016 WP No. 29535 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.29535 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN: LIONS CLUB ASHOKNAGAR CHARITABLE TRUST (REGD) DOOR NO 1-4-143/3, RAJASHREE, MALEMAR ROAD, ASHOKNAGAR DEREBAIL MANGALORE 575006, REGISTERED UNDER 12A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1965 REP BY B S KALPANA, TRUSTEE D/O SHIVANNA, AGED 58 YEARS, FLAT NO.503, PRESIDENCY PARK, C G KAMATH ROAD, KARANGALPADY, MANGALORE-575 003. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) BENGALURU UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE, MISSION ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 027. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS - WARD 1, MANGALORE – 575 001. 3. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL PROCESSING CENTRE, BANGALORE – 560 500. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.ARAVIND.V.CHAVAN, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45016 WP No. 29535 of 2025 THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 119(2)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT) DATED 17/04/2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN DIN NO FOR THE ITBA/COM/F/17/2025-26/1075671442(1) ASSESSMENT YEAR 2020-21 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned order at Annexure – A dated 17.04.2025 passed by the respondent No.1, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 119(2)(b) seeking condonation of delay of 44 days in filing Form 10B in relation to the Assessment Year 2020-21 was rejected by respondent No.1. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that in relation to the aforesaid Assessment Year 2020-21, the petitioner filed Form 10B after the prescribed period along with the application seeking condonation of delay of 44 days in filing Form 10B interalia contending that the said delay was due to procedural - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45016 WP No. 29535 of 2025 requirement of ‘Order Giving Effect’ after the grant of registration under section of 12AA of the petitioner Trust and owing to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, the petitioner was not in a position to file Form 10B within the prescribed period. It was contended that the delay in filing Form 10B was due to genuine hardship as contemplated in the Circular No.9/2015 dated 09.06.2015 and as such, the respondent committed an error in rejecting the application for condonation of delay filed by the petitioner under Section 119(2)(b) of the I.T.Act, which deserves to be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents-Revenue would support the impugned order and submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that the respondents have adopted a hyper technical approach in refusing to condone the delay without appreciating that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to file Form 10B within the prescribed period was due to procedural requirement of ‘Order Giving Effect’ after the grant of registration under Section of 12AA of the petitioner Trust, who could file Form 10B subsequent to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45016 WP No. 29535 of 2025 expiry of the prescribed period. The respondents failed to appreciate that the petitioner could not file its Form 10B within the prescribed period on account of bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, which clearly constituted genuine hardship on the part of the petitioner/assessee as contemplated in the said Circular dated 09.06.2015 and failure to appreciate this, has resulted in erroneous conclusion warranting interference by this Court in the present petition. 6. Under these circumstances, by adopting a justice oriented approach and having regard to the valid and sufficient ground pleaded by the petitioner in support of its claim for condonation of delay, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and condone the delay in filing Form 10B by the petitioner by allowing the application filed by the petitioner. 7. In the result, I pass the following: O R D E R (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order at Annexure – A dated 17.04.2025, is hereby set-aside; - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45016 WP No. 29535 of 2025 (iii) The application filed by the petitioner under Section 119(2)(b) for condonation of delay of 44 days in filing Form 10B for the Assessment Year 2020-21, is hereby allowed; (iv) The respondents are directed to accept Form 10B submitted by the petitioner for the aforesaid Assessment Year 2020-21; (v) It is needless to state that the respondents are at liberty to verify the claim of the petitioner and proceed further in accordance with law. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 59