M/S NIKON FINLEASE PVT. LTD. vs PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -04, DELHI & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 08.05.2025 + W.P.(C) 1654/2025 M/S NIKON FINLEASE PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Through: Mr Amol Sinha and Mr Ankit Kumar, Advocates. versus PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -04, DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr Gaurav Gupta, SSC, Mr Shivendra Singh, Mr Yojit Pareek, JSCs and Ms Prakriti Rastogi, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA VIBHU BAKHRU, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 09.10.2024 [impugned order] passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi – 4 [PCIT] whereby the petitioner’s application under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for condonation of delay in filing the revised income tax return [ITR] in respect of Assessment Year [AY] 2022-23, was rejected. 2. The petitioner states that it has been regularly filing its ITR for the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAM W.P. (C) 1654/2025 Page 1 of 5 KUMAR Signing Date:14.05.2025 15:57:05 past assessment years. It had also filed its ITR for the AY 2022-23 on 03.11.2022. However, the Central Processing Centre [CPC] rejected the ITR filed by the petitioner on the ground that it was not accompanied by the Tax Audit Report [TAR]. According to the petitioner, there is no requirement for furnishing a TAR as its turnover was less than ₹10.00 Crores. 3. Accordingly, on 24.12.2022 the petitioner filed the response to the communication dated 14.12.2022 issued by the CPC under Section 139(9) of the Act. The said response was not accepted and the CPC rejected the petitioner’s ITR on 13.12.2023 terming the same as invalid. The petitioner sent a communication dated 29.01.2024 seeking to contest the rej