9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (7) TMI 230 - HC - Income TaxCondonation of delay in filing revised return - CBDT declined to extend the benefit of accepting the cause shown to condone the delay in filing the revised return - Held that - The non-filing of the return and revised return within the time stipulated under section 139 of the Act, as observed by the CBDT in the order Annexure-C, cannot be attributed to the petitioner since being a co-operative society is bound by the provisions of KCS Act to have its books of account audited by a statutory auditor and until the submission of the final audit report. The delay in submission of the reports by the statutory auditors cannot but be said to be beyond the control of the petitioner. The averments in paragraph 7 of the application dt. 9.1.2010 Annexure-B is over sufficient cause for the delay in filing the return on 6.7.2006 and the revised return on 30.5.2008, though the words revised return filed on 30.5.2008 is not specifically stated - The reason assigned by the CBDT in its order Annexure-A declining the request of the petitioner to correct/revise the order dt. 11.7.2011 Annexure-C insofar as it relates to condoning the delay upto 30.5.2008 when the revised return was filed, in the factual matrix, is perverse - the order dt 11.7.2011 Annexure-C stands modified to condone the delay in filing the revised return of income for the assessment year 2005-06 - Decided in favor of assessee.
Issues:
Delay in filing returns under the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2005-06, CBDT's decision to condone the delay, Petitioner's application for rectification of the order, Justification of declining to extend the benefit of accepting the cause shown for delay in filing the revised return. Analysis: 1. The petitioner, a co-operative society, failed to file the return under the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2005-06 within the due date. The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) accepted the cause shown for the delay and directed the assessment of losses claimed. The assessment was concluded, and an appeal was pending before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 2. The petitioner filed a petition for rectification of the CBDT's order as it did not reference the revised return filed later. The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the revised return was due to the statutory auditor providing the final audit report late, which led to the discrepancy in the reported losses. 3. The petitioner contended that the CBDT's refusal to rectify the order was unjustified, as the application clearly indicated the delay and the revised return filed. The CBDT's stance was that the delay was condoned only for the original return filed, as the application did not specifically mention the revised return. 4. The primary question for decision was whether the CBDT was justified in declining to extend the benefit of accepting the cause shown for the delay in filing the revised return. The petitioner claimed a higher loss amount in the revised return based on the final audit report, which was not initially considered. 5. The court noted the discrepancy in the reported losses between the original and revised returns. It observed that the application for condonation of delay did reference the carried forward loss amount, even though the specific mention of the revised return was missing. 6. The court acknowledged that the delay in filing the returns was due to the statutory auditor's late submission of reports, which was beyond the petitioner's control. The petitioner's explanation for the delay covered both the original and revised returns, as evident from the application. 7. The court found the CBDT's reasoning for not correcting the order regarding the revised return filing as unjustified. It allowed the petition, quashed the CBDT's order, and modified the assessment to include the condonation of the delay in filing the revised return for the assessment year 2005-06. In conclusion, the court ruled in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing the importance of considering all relevant factors and documents in tax assessments and rectifications to ensure fairness and accuracy in the process.
|
