VRG ELECTRONICS PVT LTD vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI 7 & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 9th April, 2026 + W.P.(C) 2625/2026 & CM APPL. 12771/2026 VRG ELECTRONICS PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shahrukh Ejaz & Mr. Ganiul Hakim, Advs. versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI 7 & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Puneet Rai, SSC with Mr.Ashvini Kumar, JSC CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR JUDGMENT DINESH MEHTA, J. (ORAL) 1. By way of the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged order dated 12.12.2025, passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, PCIT, Delhi-7 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Commissioner’) whereby the petitioner’s application under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1961’) was rejected. 2. The order impugned was passed pursuant to an application which was filed by the petitioner-assessee on 20.11.2025, wherein it had sought condonation of delay in filing Form 10IC (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Form’) for AY 2023-24, which is necessary for exercising the option under Section 115BAA of the Act of 1961. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NAVEEN KUMAR W.P.(C) 2625/2026 Page 1 of 5 Signing Date:13.04.2026 18:20:16 3. By moving the application, the assessee had submitted that though it was required to furnish the Form by due date of return i.e., 31.10.2023, but due to a lapse on the part of the accountant, neither the return was filed by the due date, nor was the Form furnished. 4. While informing that the Return of Income was filed on 30.12.2023 i.e., within the time period given under Section 139(4) of the Act of 1961, Mr. Shahrukh Ejaz, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the Form could not be furnished as the timeline for furnishing th