- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51283 WP No. 36787 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.36787 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SRI DARRYLL BRIAN DAWSON, AUCKLAND, NEWZELAND, PAN CAWPD9192E PERMANENT RESIDENT AT, NO.26, 4TH BLOCK, H P NAGAR, BEML NAGAR, KGF – 563 115, REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER, DONALD LESLIE DAWSON, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, S/O ANTHONY DAWSON, NO.26, 4TH BLOCK, H P NAGAR, BEML NAGAR, KGF – 563 115 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S.V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD INTL TAXATION 1(1) BANGALORE – 560 095. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTL TAXATION, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 095. 3. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INTL TAXATION, BMTC BUILDING, Digitally signed by MADHURI S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51283 WP No. 36787 of 2025 80 FEET ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR A DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER OF REJECTION OF CONDONATION APPLICATION OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT ‘THE ACT’) DATED 25/07/2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN DIN ITBA/COM/F/17/2025-26/1078906745(1) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2024-25 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, 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 25.07.2025 passed by respondent No.2, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 119(2)(b) seeking condonation of delay 56 in filing the income tax returns in relation to the Assessment Year 2024-25 was rejected by the respondent No.2. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51283 WP No. 36787 of 2025 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that in relation to the aforesaid Assessment Year 2024-25, the petitioner filed returns after the prescribed period along with the application seeking condonation of delay of 56 days in filing the returns interalia contending that due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, the petitioner was not in a position to file the returns within the prescribed period. It was contended that the delay in filing the I.T. returns was due to genuine hardship as contemplated in the Circular No.9/2015 dated 09.06.2015 and as such, the respondents 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 I.T. returns within the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51283 WP No. 36787 of 2025 prescribed period was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, who could file the I.T. returns subsequent to expiry of the prescribed period. The respondents failed to appreciate that the petitioner could not file his I.T. returns 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, adopting a justice oriented approach and having regard to valid and sufficient grounds pleaded by the petitioner in support of his claim for condonation of delay, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and condone the delay in filing the returns 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. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51283 WP No. 36787 of 2025 (ii) The impugned order at Annexure-A dated 25.07.2025 is hereby set-aside; (iii) The application filed by the petitioner under Section 119(2)(b) for condonation of delay of 56 days in filing Income Tax Returns for the Assessment Year 2024-25 is hereby allowed; (iv) The respondents are directed to accept the returns submitted by the petitioner for the aforesaid Assessment Year 2024-25; (v) It is needless to state that 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.: 37