TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 262X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ground that the delay in notifying the forms would cause great hardship to the tax payers. We are unable to appreciate how a delay of 83 days in making the ITR Form Nos.1,2, 2A and 4S in case of non-audit will cause great prejudice and delay of 120 days in making ITR Form Nos.3,4,5,6 and 7 does not cause any prejudice. The Gujarat High Court noted that the Scheme of the Act indicates that ordinarily a period of 180 days is available to the assessee to file income tax return in case of E-filing of return of income in Form Nos.3,4,5,6, and 7. Any curtailment of this period on account of non-availability of the necessary utility for filing a return online, does certainly cause prejudice to the assessee wholly on account of the delay on the part of the CBDT to notify the ITR Forms. It is clear that it was also of the view that the CBDT should make available the necessary ITR Forms on 1st April of the subject Assessment Year for the benefit of the assessee. However, in case, there is any delay, the same should be recorded in writing and also consider whether in view of the delay, an extension of time in filing return is warranted. Taking into account the fact that the decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in exercise of the powers conferred under section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), hereby orders that the returns of income due to be e-filed by September 30, 2015, may be filed by October 31, 2015, in cases of Income-tax assessees of the State(s) of the Punjab and Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandigarh. 2. This order shall be subject to the outcome of any further appeal/ special leave petition which the Central Board of Direct Taxes may file against the said judgment. Second order The Central Board of Direct Taxes, in compliance with the order of hon'ble Gujarat High Court dated September 29, 2015, in the case of All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants v. CBDT (Special Civil Application No. 15075 of 2015)- [2015] 378 ITR 160 and in exercise of the powers conferred under section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), hereby orders that the returns of income due to be e- filed by September 30, 2015, may be filed by October 31, 2015, in the cases of Income-tax assessees of the State of Gujarat. 2. This order shall be subject to the outcome of any further appeal/ special leave petition which the Central Board of Direct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 119 of the Act, accepting the order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Gujarat High Court and extended the time to file up to October 31, 2015, only in respect of assessees in the above two States and in the Union Territory of Chandigarh. 9. Dr. Shivram, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner, invited our attention today to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants (supra) which has extended the due date till October 31, 2015. This has been accepted by the Central Board of Direct Taxes having extended the filing of e-form of the ITR returns from September 30, 2015, to October 31, 2015, by issuing an order under section 119 of the Act as pointed out above. 10. The grievances raised in this petition are more or less similar to the one raised before the Gujarat High Court and the Punjab and Haryana High Court. It is that the Central Board of Direct Taxes/Central Government had failed in its obligation to notify ITR Forms, in particular, Forms Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 on April 1, 2015, all of which have the due date of being filed with the Income-tax Department before September 30, 2015. 11. It is excepted of the S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te of the Department only with effect from August 7, 2015. Thus, if the forms were notified as expected on 1st April of the year, then the assessee concerned would have had 183 days time available to collect the necessary information so as to enable them to e-file their returns of income, giving all particulars expected of them. However, in view of the delay in notifying the forms, the available time for the assessee to fill up the forms was restricted to 55 to 61 days, depending upon the dates when the forms are notified. Thus, in view of short time available, assessees were finding it difficult to comply with all the requirements sought in the notified forms. Besides, non-filing of return of income before the prescribed date would result in great prejudice to the assessees as any claim for set off of loss would not be allowed to be carried forward will deprive them of deduction under section 43B of the Act and also deduction under Chapter VI-A of the Act. Besides, if there is any omission/mistake in the filing of the return of income, if filed beyond the due date, it would also deprive the assessee an opportunity to file revised return of income. 15. The present situation has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y view of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Gujarat High Court. Besides, each court is entitled to take its own view (see CIT v. Thana Electricity Supply Ltd. [1994] 206 ITR 727 (Bom)). 17. Mr. Suresh Kumar, also placed reliance upon the order dated September 29, 2015, passed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes under section 119 of the Act consequent to the order of the Karnataka High Court directing it to deal with the representation filed by the Karnataka State Chartered Accountants Association, to contend that this court should not interfere with the executive action of not extending the date of September 30, 2015, to e-file the returns. As pointed out above, the view of the Gujarat High Court as also the view of the Punjab and Haryana High Court of extending the due date to October 31, 2015, has been accepted by the Central Board of Direct Taxes as evidenced by having issued an order on September 30, 2015, under section 119 of the Act by extending the time in respect of the assessees in the State of Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Gujarat High Court. We also notice that the order dated September 29, 2015, under section 119 of the Act dealt with the representat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the forms, etc., which are to be prescribed for the audit report and for filing the ITR are available as on 1st April of the assessment year unless there is a valid reason therefor and which should be recorded in writing by the respondents themselves, without waiting for any representations to be made. The respondents, while doing so, to also take a decision whether owing thereto any extension of the due date is required to be prescribed and accordingly notify the public. From the aforesaid observations of the Delhi High Court, it is clear that it was also of the view that the Central Board of Direct Taxes should make available the necessary ITR Forms on 1st April of the subject assessment year for the benefit of the assessee. However, in case, there is any delay, the same should be recorded in writing and also consider whether in view of the delay, an extension of time in filing return is warranted. 19. It may be noted that despite sufficient time being available, the respondent-Revenue has chosen not to file any affidavit-in-reply. It is in this view of the matter, we are at this stage unable to consider all the aspect of the matter which may arise in the present case. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
