Delay in filing Form No. 9A condoned as form 9A newly introduced

By POONAM GANDHI Income Tax Judiciary November 27, 2025

TaxGuru Citation: 2025 taxguru.in 11662
Case Name: Lakhi Trust Vs ITO (Bombay High Court)
Appeal Number: Only available for paid members
Date of Judgement/Order: Only available for paid members
Related Assessment Year: 2016-17
Courts: All High Courts, Bombay High Court

Already Upgraded? Log in.

Lakhi Trust Vs ITO (Bombay High Court)

Bombay High Court held that delay in filing of Form No. 9A due to first year of its introduction is genuine and hence the same is condoned. Further, also held that if delay is not condoned there will be genuine hardship to charitable trust.

Facts- The present Writ Petition challenges the order dated 18^th February, 2025, passed by the Respondent No. 2 under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, rejecting the Petitioner’s application dated 10^th December, 2018, for condonation of delay in filing Form No. 9A for the Assessment Year 2016-2017. Respondent No. 2 has by the impugned order, refused to condone the delay of 784 days in filing Form No. 9A. Consequently, the Petitioner’s claim for deemed application of income under clause (2) of the Explanation to sub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Act has been denied to the Petitioner.

Conclusion- Held that admittedly, Assessment Year 2016-2017 was the first year wherein filing of Form No. 9A was prescribed by the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2015. Hence, the possibility of the Petitioner having inadvertently failed to file the same cannot be ruled out. Precisely for this reason, the Board issued various Circulars empowering the Commissioner of Income-Tax to condone the delay in filing of Form No. 9A and Form 10 in genuine cases and to decide the issue on merits. Further, Form No. 9A having been filed during the course of assessment proceedings, the same should have been considered. We find that the Petitioner is a charitable Trust carrying on various Charitable activities for the last 38 years, and if this delay is not condoned, there will be genuine hardship to the Petitioner, inasmuch as the Petitioner would be saddled with a tax liability of Rs. 51,93,031/-, even though it has substantially complied with the provisions of Section 11 of the Act. Thus, we quash and set aside the impugned order dated 18^th February, 2025 passed by Respondent No. 2 under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act and condone the delay in filing Form 9A by the Petitioner.