9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng auditor and therefore, the respondent after getting No Objection Certificate from the erstwhile auditor had uploaded the Return of Income along with the Tax Audit Report on 07.01.2015 and by then, there was a delay of 37 days. Further, the learned Writ Court rightly pointed out that by the delayed submission of Return of Income, the respondent does not stand to benefit in any manner whatsoever. Thus, the learned Writ Court was satisfied that the explanation given by the respondent was sufficient for condonation of delay of 37 days in filing the Return of Income and such a delay should not defeat the claim of the respondent. We have also seen the reasons assigned by the respondent for belatedly filing the return. As rightly pointed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The respondent also sought for a further direction upon the appellants to accept Return of Income filed by them for the Assessment Year 2014-15 under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ). The learned single Bench by the impugned order allowed the writ petition and set aside the order passed by the first appellant dated 01.06.2016. The Revenue is on appeal before us questioning the correctness of the impugned order. 3. We have heard Mrs.Hema Muralikrishnan, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue and Mr.R.Sivaraman, learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioner. 4. The first appellant while rejecting the request of the respondent for condonation of delay of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f providing expert valuation report from other professional firm to satisfy their concerns. Thus, the respondent having left with no other alternative had to appoint another auditor, for which purpose, a No Objection Certificate was required to be obtained from the erstwhile auditor. 7. The Writ Court after considering the factual position as well as the decisions relied on either side held that the respondent cannot appoint a new auditor without getting a No Objection Certificate from the existing auditor and therefore, the respondent after getting No Objection Certificate from the erstwhile auditor had uploaded the Return of Income along with the Tax Audit Report on 07.01.2015 and by then, there was a delay of 37 days. Further, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng with the Audit Report is condonable. The observations made by the first appellant in the order dated 01.06.2016 largely pertained to the respondent's eligibility to carry forward the loss claimed by them in the return of income. Further, the first appellant in the order dated 01.06.2016 has made an observation that if the reasons given by the assessee is accepted as a valid ground it may encourage other tax payers to follow suit. The appellants need not have any apprehension in that regard because exercise of discretion for the purpose of condonation of delay can be only based on the facts and circumstances of each case and therefore, there can be no set precedent on such issues. 10. The learned single Bench was satisfied with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
