TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>CBDT Ordered to Extend Income Tax Return Filing Deadline Aligning with Tax Audit Reports</h1> <h3>All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants Versus Central Board of Direct Taxes</h3> All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants Versus Central Board of Direct Taxes - TMI Issues Involved:1. Non-extension of the due date for filing Income Tax Returns (ITR) despite extending the due date for filing Tax Audit Reports (TAR).2. Hardship caused to taxpayers and professionals due to the non-extension of ITR filing dates.3. Legal validity of the CBDT's notification under section 119 of the Income Tax Act.4. Impact on self-assessment tax collection due to non-extension of ITR filing dates.Detailed Analysis:1. Non-extension of the due date for filing Income Tax Returns (ITR):The primary issue revolves around the CBDT extending the due date for filing TAR to 30th November 2014, while the due date for filing ITR remained 30th September 2014. This discrepancy created a situation where taxpayers could not benefit from the extension of TAR due date, as the ITR filing date was not correspondingly extended. The court noted that the specified date for TAR under section 44AB is the same as the due date for ITR under section 139(1). Hence, the legislative intent was to keep both dates aligned.2. Hardship caused to taxpayers and professionals:The court acknowledged the significant hardship faced by taxpayers and professionals due to this non-extension. The petitioners argued that without the TAR, it is challenging to ensure the correct income is reflected in the ITR. The court also recognized that filing ITR without TAR could lead to errors, multiplicity of proceedings, and potential penalties under section 271B. The court emphasized that the delay in providing the new utility software for e-filing TAR further exacerbated this hardship.3. Legal validity of the CBDT's notification under section 119:The court scrutinized the legal validity of the CBDT's notification extending the TAR due date under section 119. It was observed that section 119 does not empower the CBDT to relax the provisions of section 44AB, which mandates the same date for TAR and ITR. The court concluded that the notification extending only the TAR due date was beyond the CBDT's authority, as section 119 does not include section 44AB in the list of provisions that can be relaxed.4. Impact on self-assessment tax collection:The respondents argued that extending the ITR due date would delay the collection of self-assessment tax, potentially causing a loss of interest revenue. The court found this argument unconvincing, noting that the potential loss was minimal compared to the overall tax receipts and could be mitigated by charging interest under section 234A for late filing of returns.Conclusion:The court directed the CBDT to extend the due date for filing ITR to 30th November 2014, aligning it with the extended due date for TAR. This extension was granted with the condition that interest under section 234A could still be levied for late filing. The court emphasized that the CBDT's failure to extend the ITR due date was unjustified and caused undue hardship to taxpayers and professionals. The judgment highlighted the importance of aligning due dates for TAR and ITR to ensure accurate and fair tax administration.
TaxTMI 