9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1042X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30/09/2016 to 17/10/2016 only in respect of assessees whose accounts are required to be audited under the Income tax Act. As in the second para of the press release dated 09/09/2016, the CBDT in categorical terms states that it has decided to extend the last date for such returns which was due on 30/09/2016 to 17/10/2016. The said extended due date benefit cannot be extended to those assessee s who were liable to get their accounts audited under any other law for the time being in force which is the case as that of the assessee before us. Hence, we hold that due date of filing of income tax return for the assessee for A.Yrs. 2016-17 is 30/09/2016 and not 17/10/2016 as contended by the ld. AR. From the perusal of the RBI permission letter dated 05/08/1985 mandating the assessee to get his accounts audited, we are of the considered opinion that what RBI mandate was only for the competence of the Chartered Accountant i.e. to say that a Chartered Accountant who is capable of auditing the corporate assessees should conduct the audit of the assessee herein. This was the sole mandate of RBI permission letter dated 05/08/1985. Due date for the assessee herein is only 30/09/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s 154 by ADIT, CPC, on the ground that applicable due date of filing return of income will be 05.08.2016 u/s 139(1) of the LT. Act, 1961which is applicable to appellant's case whose accounts are not subject to audit. The appellant is liable to get its accounts audited as per RBI's approval letter dated 05th August, 1985. The appellant prays that accounts were audited by Qualified Chartered Accountants as prescribed by the Companies Act, 19567, hence confirming the order u/s 143(1) and 154 is bad in law. 4. Learned CIT(A) 58 Mumbai erred in law in confirming the order u/s 143(1)and 154 by ADIT CPC, by misconstruing and misinterpreting clause ill of RBI's approval letter dated 5th August, 1985 presuming that sanction is given for audit of limited company only. The appellant prays that RBI's letter dated 05th August, 1985 states the concern should have its accounts audited annually by qualified accountants competent to audit the accounts of limited companies. As per provisions of section 227 and 228 of the Companies Act, 1956, qualified chartered accountant practicing as proprietor/ firm are entitled to audit accounts of proprietary concern, firms, limited com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Hon'ble Members of the Tribunal. 3. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that assessee is carrying on business of Agencies of shipyards and marine electronics by way of representing foreign shipyard and /or ship owner for ship repairing and/or day docking purposes as a proprietor in the name of Nautilus international (India). Assessee is carrying on business since 1975-76 in the above Proprietorship Name. Thereafter, in the Year 1983-84 (AY 1984-85) he became Non-Resident and continued the said business. 3.1. Since he became Non-Resident, as required, under Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) provisions, he was required to take approval from Reserve Bank of India for continuing his said Proprietary business. Permission was granted u/s 29(1)(a) of the FERA 1973 vide RBI's Letter dated 05/08/1985. As per the clause (iii) of said R.B.I permission, one of the condition was Accounts are to be audited by Chartered Accountant. Accordingly, for the year under consideration i.e. for A.Y.2016-17, the accounts of the assessee were audited by a Chartered Accountant on 15/10/2016. The return of income for the A.Y.2016-17 wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the assessee to continue his business in India. We find that the expression due date is defined in Explanation-2 to Section 139(1) of the Act which reads as under:- Explanation 2. In this sub-section, due date means, (a) where the assessee [other than an assessee referred to in clause (aa]) is (i) a company;[***] or (ii) a person (other than a company) whose accounts are required to be audited under this Act or under any other law for the time being in force; or (iii) a working partner of a firm whose accounts are required to be audited under this Act or under any other law for the time being in force, The [30th day of September] of the assessment year; (aa) in the case of an assessee [who] is required to furnish a report referred to in section 92E, the 30th day of November of the assessment year; (b) in the case of a person other than a company, referred to in the first proviso to this sub-section, the 31st day of October of the assessment year; (c) in the case of any other assessee, the 31st day of July of the assessment year. 3.3. We find that assessee s case herein falls under the ambit of Explanation 2(a)(ii) to Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
