TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (9) TMI 1123
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....c. Issue appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, thereby directing the Respondents to extend / increase the due date of filing the Income Tax Returns as prescribed under Section 139(1) and furnishing Audit Reports under Section 44 AB of the Income Tax Act, to the extent of delay in number of days in notifying the prescribed Income Tax Forms under Rule 12 of the Income Tax Rules 1962 after 01.04.2015; and / or d. Issue appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, thereby declaring the decision of the Respondents No.1 and 2 vide its Press Release Dated 09.09.2015 as null and void and in contravention of the provisions of Part III of the Constitution of India, by virtue of which, the Respondent No.1 and 2 has not extended the date for filing of returns due by 30.09.2015 for Assessment Year 2015-2016 for certain categories of Assesses including Companies, and Firms and, Individuals Engaged in Proprietary Business / Profession etc., whose Accounts are required to be Audited in terms of the Income Tax Act 1961; and / or e. Issue Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Certiorari and / or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction for the purpose of quashing the said Press Release Date....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of proper and efficient management of the work of assessment and collection of revenue, issue from time to time, general or special orders including by way of relaxation of any of the provisions of inter alia Section 139. 7. It is the case of the petitioner that in exercise of power under Section 119(2), the CBDT can extend the date of 30th September as has been done in the current year also in relation to assessees not amenable to audit, the due date for whom was 31st July, 2015 but was extended to 31st August, 2015 and ultimately to 7th September, 2015. It is contended that though there was a demand for a similar extension in the case of the due date of 30th September, 2015 also but the same has not been acceded to, without giving any reasons therefor. 8. The petitioner claims to be entitled to such extension owing to the delay on the part of the respondents in prescribing the form of the return to be filed by the assessees due date wherefor is 30th September, 2015. It is contended that the said forms were prescribed only vide Notification dated 29th July, 2015 and were made available only w.e.f. 7th August, 2015. 9. The argument of the counsel for the petitioner is that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in mind also it is in public interest that sufficient time should be available to the assessees and practitioners of income tax for auditing and filing ITRs. 12. I have considered the aforesaid contentions. 13. The period claimed by the petitioner as a matter of right of 180 days for filing the ITR is admittedly not prescribed, neither in the Statute nor in the Rules. According to the counsel for the petitioner also, the same has to be deduced from the scheme of the Act. 14. I am afraid, I am unable to gauge any such scheme in the Act assuring 180 days to the assessee for filing the ITR. As already observed above, filing of ITR for assesses due date wherefor is 180 days is dependent upon the accounts of the assessee being audited and which audit the counsel for the petitioner admits commences only on the beginning of assessment year. The said audit, in the case of some assesses may be completed in a few days and in case of others may take longer. Thus, the time taken in audit, which is variable, will be determinative of the time available thereafter for filing the ITR. The said audit is not dependent upon the prescription of the forms for report of the said audit and / or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s else not found by me to be illogical or unreasonable to enable the assessees to file the ITR. 18. The counsel for the petitioner has then argued that the respondents will not suffer any prejudice by granting such extension of time beyond 30th September, 2015 for filing ITR inasmuch as interest, if any payable on the tax due would then be paid till the extended date for filing of the ITR. 19. However the test to be applied in such matters is not of seeing whether the respondents would suffer any prejudice or not, without first being satisfied of the infringement of rights of the petitioner and/or prejudice being caused to the petitioner. If no right is infringed and no prejudice is found to be caused to the petitioner, merely because no prejudice would be caused to the respondents by extending the time for filing the ITR would not be a ground for interfering with the policy decision of the Government and granting such extension. 20. Faced therewith, the counsel for the petitioner has made two other arguments. Firstly, it is contended that since the due date of 31st July was extended till 7th September, the practitioners of Income Tax remained busy till 7th September, 2015....