Brief of the case:
By this petition petitioners sought relief by way of writ and prayed before court that due date of filing ITR should be extended. Petitioner prayed before court on relying upon the upon the decision of Gujarat HC dated 30.09.2015 in WP No. 15075/2015 in the matter of All Gujarat Federation of Income-tax Consultants Vs. CBDT and decision of P & H HC dated 29.09.2015 in WP No. 19770/2015 in Vishal Garg Vs. UOI. It was argued that the above decisions were accepted by CBDT and the due date was extended in the respective territories of the High Court’s jurisdiction. Hon’ble HC after considering the above two judgments held that held that it is very unfair that benefit regarding an all India statute is restricting its benefit to only two states and one Union territory.
Facts of the case:
- It is expected that state would notify the required ITR forms on 1st of April of the AY. The forms will provide the information to the assessees what to file or submit in the return while e-filing.
- The delay caused prejudice to the class of assessees on which TAR is applicable. Those assessees have very shortage of time which is likely to result in inaccurate return.
- In view of the delay in having notified the ITR form nos. 3,4,5,6 & 7, various assessees had in individual capacity made representations that the time to file e-return in form nos. 3,4,5,6 & 7 be extended in view of prejudice as pointed out above.
- The petitioners also filed representations dated 25.08.2015 before CBDT who vide press release 09.09.2015 rejected the representation and informed that due date would not be extended. However, petitioner did not deal with all the issues raised by the petitioners.
- Thereafter petitioners made another representation before CBDT seeking extension of time which was not responded by the CBDT.
- Thus it was requested to extend the due date of ITR by this instant petition which was filed on relying upon the decision passed by Hon’ble Gujarat HC and P&H HC due to which CBDT extended due date in the respective territories in which order of extension has been passed by the courts.
Contention of the revenue:
