TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntry, the same consumed some time and the said statutory auditors were able to complete the audit only on 15-11-2001 and the audit under Section 44AB was completed on 28-11-2001 and that the return for the said year was filed the very next day. – The other reason cited in the said application was that there was a change in management – Held that: - the Petitioner cannot be blamed for the delay in carrying out its audit, as the same was beyond its control. - It is well settled that in matters of condonation of delay a highly pedantic approach should be eschewed and a justice oriented approach should be adopted and a party should not be made to suffer on account of technicalities. - the delay in filing the return to stand condoned and the Pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Section 119(2)(b) for condonation of delay, in filing the return. In the said application the reasons, as to why the return could not be filed within time were mentioned in paragraph 3 of the said application. The principal ground on which the condonation of delay was sought by the Petitioner was on account of the fact that the statutory auditors for the Assessment Year 2000-2001 were appointed by the Commissioner of Corporation and the Registrar Cooperative Societies , Maharashtra State, Pune, on 3-9-2001 and since the said statutory auditors had to complete the audit of 53 branches spread all over the country, the same consumed some time and the said statutory auditors were able to complete the audit only on 15-11-2001 and the audit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tutory obligation under Section 44AB of the said Act, so as to get its accounts audited within specified time to file the return of income within due date. 5 We have heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner Shri Ajay R. Singh and the Learned Counsel for the Respondents Shri Suresh Kumar. Both the Learned Counsel made submissions in respect of their respective cases for condonation of delay and against it. We have considered the rival contentions. 6 At the outset, it would be relevant to reproduce Section 119(2) (b) of the said Act, which reads as follows: "119(2)(b) the Board may, if it considers it desirable or expedient so to do for avoiding genuine hardship in any case or class of cases, by general or special order author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -2001. It appears that the said authority appointed Chartered Accountants to be statutory auditors in place of the Departmental Auditors. This change was made in respect of all the societies. Therefore, the Petitioner, in our view, cannot be blamed for the delay in carrying out its audit, as the same was beyond its control. The contention of the Learned Counsel for the Respondents that the departmental auditors, in fact, had started the audit in the year 2000 and it was for the Petitioner to get the audit expedited, cannot be accepted. Though the departmental auditors might have started the audit, it appears that pursuant to the said policy decision that was taken, the departmental auditors were replaced by the Chartered Accountants to be t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
