Order under section 119 of Income Tax Act for extension of due date to 31 October 2015

Status of Delhi HC petition for extension of due date

Honble Delhi High Court today ie. 21.09.2015 in WP(C) 9032/2015 titled as Avinash Gupta V/s Union of India and others while disposing off the WRIT after a long hearing of 1 hour and while considering all the arguments raised therein Had interalia issued directions to CBDT To notify IT Forms on or before 1st day of the assessment year. Incase on non notification of forms to record reasons for not doing the same.
This is a historic moment since the CBDT has been asked to notify the forms well in time and henceforth extentions may not be sought,if forms are available timely.
A copy of the order would be available by tomorrow and shall be circulated to all thereafter. Further legal advise and opinion in this matter is being sought.
Regards
Petitioner before Honble Delhi HC

Income Tax Return due date extended to 7th September 2015

Government of India

Ministry of Finance

Department of Revenue

Central Board of Direct Taxes

PRESS RELEASE

New Delhi, 2nd September, 2015

Sub: Extension of due date for filing of returns – reg.

The ‘due-date’ for filing of income tax return for Assessment Year 2015-16 was extended till 31st August, 2015 vide Order F.No. 225/154/2015/ITA-II dated 10th June, 2015 in case of those taxpayers who were required to file the tax return by 31st July, 2015.

The Government has received representations that tax payers have faced difficulties in E-filing of returns across the country due to slowing down of certain e-services on 31st August 2015.

Considering these representations, Central Board Direct Taxes has extended the ‘due-date’ for E-filing returns of income from 31st August 2015 to 7th September 2015 in respect of all taxpayers who were required to E-file their returns of income by 31st August 2015. 

(Shefali Shah) Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) Official Spokesperson, CBDT

Gujarat High Court orders CBDT to extend due date

Judgement on writ petition filed regarding extension of filing of Income Tax Return for FY 2013-14 has been delivered.

CBDT has already extended due date for filing of Tax Audit Report from 30 September to 30 November 2014. However, due date to file tax returns were not extended citing loss of Revenue to the Department.

The Gujarat HC in its judgement has ordered CBDT to extend the due date by arriving at a middle ground stating interest under section 234A would be levied if due taxes are paid after the original due date.

The action of CBDT on this judgement will be awaited with much enthusiasm, whether it provides fair extended due date to taxpayers or goes into Appeal against this judgement!

Sec 43B Deduction Does Not Apply To Employees PF/ ESIC Contribution: Gujarat High Court

CIT vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corp (Gujarat High Court)

Employees’ PF/ ESI Contribution is not covered by Sec 43B & is only allowable as a deduction u/s 36(1)(va) if paid by the “due date” prescribed therein


In AY 2005-06 the assessee collected Rs.51 crore from its employees as their contribution to the provident fund but deposited an amount of Rs.21 crore with the provident fund trust within the time allowed under the Provident Fund Act. The shortfall was deposited with the PF trust before the due date for filing the ROI u/s 139(1). The AO held that the amount not deposited in time was assessable as “income” u/s 2(24)(x) & that a deduction u/s 36(1)(va) could not be allowed as the payment was not within the prescribed “due date”. He also held that s. 43B applied only to the employer’s contribution. On appeal by the assessee, the CIT(A) and ITAT upheld the assessee’s claim by relying on Alom Extrusions Ltd 319 ITR 306 (SC). On appeal by the department to the High Court HELD allowing the appeal:

S. 43B which permits a deduction for payments made upto the due date for filing the ROI applies only to the employer’s contribution to the provident fund etc. It does not apply to the employees’ contribution. The employees’ contribution received by the employer-assessee is deemed to be income in the assessee’s hands u/s 2(24)(x) and if the assessee has not credited the said sum to the employees’ account in the relevant fund or funds on or before the due date mentioned in Explanation to s. 36(1)(va), the assessee shall not be entitled to deductions of such amount in computing the income referred to in s. 28 of the Act. The argument that two view are possible is not acceptable because only one view is possible on a correct interpretation of the provision (Alom Extrusions 319 ITR 306 (SC) distinguished, Aimil Ltd 321 ITR 508 (Del), Nipso Polyfabriks 350 ITR 327 (HP), Spectrum Consultants 34 taxmann.com 20 (Kar), Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sandh 35 taxmann.com 616 (Raj) & Hemla Embroidery Mills (P&H) dissented

Note: The consequence is that if the payment of employees’ contribution is delayed, a deduction will never be allowed. The same view is taken in LKP Securities following ITC Ltd 112 ITD 57 (Kol)(SB). Contrast with Kichha Sugar 356 ITR 351 (Utt) where it was held that the “due date” in s. 36(1)(va) meant the “due date” for filing ROI u/s 139(1). See also Bharati Shipyard 132 ITD 53 (SB)(Mum) where it was held that s. 43B applies even to the employees’ contribution

Open Complaint Letter to ICAI President for unable to get extension of Due Date

From: Shripad Khire <sdkhire@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 12:19 PM
> Subject: Extension for efiling ..cruel joke
> To: "president@icai.in" <president@icai.in>
>
>
>
>> Dear Sir,
>>
>> This has reference to the order passed u/s 119 of the Income tax Act extending the time limit for e-filing the tax audit report. . In this connection I would like to like to express my   utter dismay for total handling of the said issue by the Institute and Direct Tax Committee.
>> Our esteemed institute has miserably failed to represent genuine difficulties faced by CA fraternity, who has wasted its valuable time on uploading TARs with the help of ever changing bug infested utilities provided by Income Tax Department
>> The institute and central council members could not assert the point that it was not the assessee that was finding it difficult to upload the report but the reports were supposed to be uploaded by the CAs . On an average , every CA has to upload 30 to 45 audit reposrts.
>> The CAs had to spent abnormally excessive time to complete the formalities of  e-filing the reports which resulted in pendency of remaining audits.
>> For all this time central council members were unofficially assuring that the extension will be given for tax audits due to failure on the part of Income tax Department to provide proper platform for uploading the reports.
>> The Government was making changes every alternate day and poor CAs were struggling to keep pace with half cooked utilities which were not only slow but also defective.
>> And now when there are only 3-4 days left for deadline, Income Tax Department has come with so called relaxation circular which in fact is more damaging in present situation.
>> We are really disgusted by the approach and ineffectiveness  of the Institute which could not protect the interests of CAs when for the first time in tax audit history demand was made from CA FRATERNITY and not by the assesses for extension.
>> And what is painfully surprising, even after this horrible circular nobody from the institute has openly come forward to condemn this Government approach.
>>
>> This is really shameful
>>
>> CA Shripad Khire