Communication Quashed After PAN Jurisdiction Change: Bengaluru HC Grants Relief:

The High Court of Karnataka directed the Bengaluru PCIT to consider the petitioner's delay-condonation plea under Section 119(2)(b).
HC Directs Fresh Decision on Delay Condonation Plea

Communication Quashed After PAN Jurisdiction Change: Bengaluru HC Grants Relief
The High Court directed the Bengaluru PCIT to consider the petitioner’s delay-condonation request under Section 119(2)(b) after jurisdiction over the PAN was transferred from Kolkata to Bengaluru.
The present case has been filed by M/S Gladiator Commodities Pvt. Ltd against the Union of India and others, seeking to set aside a communication issued by the Income Tax Department, marked as Annexure-G.
Background of the Case
The matter relates to the assessment year 2020-2021. The petitioner had earlier submitted a representation on December 14, 2021 (Annexure-E) to the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT), Bengaluru, requesting condonation of the delay in filing the income tax return under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
However, the Income Tax Department issued a letter (Annexure-G) stating that the petitioner’s Permanent Account Number (PAN) fell under the jurisdiction of the PCIT, Central-2, Kolkata. The petitioner was therefore advised to approach the concerned authority in Kolkata for relief.
During the hearing, the petitioner's lawyer informed the Court that a request had been made to transfer the PAN to the Bengaluru jurisdiction. It was submitted that the transfer had been approved while the writ petition was pending. In view of this development, the petitioner requested that the communication at Annexure-G be set aside and that the Bengaluru PCIT be directed to consider the earlier representation for condonation of delay.
High Court's Ruling
Considering all the above facts, the Court observed that Annexure-E was essentially a request for condonation of the delay in filing the return. In light of the change in jurisdiction, the Court disposed of the petition by directing the jurisdictional Principal Commissioner of Income Tax at Bengaluru to consider and decide the representation in accordance with law.
The Court directed the petitioner to appear before the concerned authority on April 21, 2026. The High Court instructed the authority to take an appropriate decision as per the law. All contentions on merits are kept open.
About Author
Vanshika verma
Content Writer
Vanshika Verma is a Content Writer with 1+ year of experience at Studycafe.in. A B.Com graduate from Delhi University, She writes articles on Finance, Tax, ICAI, GST, and the latest financial news, with a focus on making complex topics easy for readers and professionals.
Vanshika Verma is a Content Writer with 1+ year of experience at Studycafe.in. A B.Com graduate from Delhi University, She writes articles on Finance, Tax, ICAI, GST, and the latest financial news, with a focus on making complex topics easy for readers and professionals.
Studycafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
2143My Recent Articles
- Government Sets 5% GST on Pre-Packaged Fertilisers and Retreaded Tractor Tyres, Retains 18% Rate on Other Used Rubber Tyres from November 1
- Former Tamil Nadu School Education Minister Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi Moves Court for Bail, Challenges Arrest in Alleged Rs 100 Crore Private School Fraud Case
- CBIC Clarifies GST Treatment of Export Payments, INR Receipts and Set-Off Transactions
- CBIC Introduces Fresh Guidelines for GST Proceedings, Emphasises Taxpayer Rights, Detailed Notices, Fair Adjudication and Reduction of Unnecessary Litigation
- Share India Securities Discloses Rs 1.18 Lakh Penalty for MWPL Violation, Says No Material Business Impact
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts
All Posts
Recent Posts
All Posts








