CA Sandeep Kanoi

Status Updated Till 26.09.2014 (7.00 AM)

Chartered Accountants and Trade Associations around the country has filed Public Interest Litigation (PIL) before various high courts  for extension of Due date of ITR in line with Tax Audit Report Due date for A.Y. 2014-15.

We are giving below the daily status PILs filed before various High Court :-

I. All India Federation Of Tax Practitioners, Mumbai Vs. Union of India & CBDT ( High Court at Hyderabad for the States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh) , WP 28159/2014,  WP 28672/2014

23.09.2014– Disposed of by the Hon’ble High Court at Hyderabad  observing that there is no justification or reason to extend the date for TAR alone and not to extend the date for ITR and accordingly the Union of India and CBDT were directed to consider the contents of the representations of AIFTP  for extending the date for filing ITRs in tandem with the date for TAR and dispose of the representations well before the date for filing ITR i.e. 30-09-2014. Read More – AP High Court to CBDT – Consider extension of Due date of ITR to 30.11.2014

II. Rajni Mangaldas Shah V/S Central Board Of Direct Taxes (Gujarat High Court),   SCA/12571/2014

 All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants Vs. CBDT (Gujarat High Court) SCA 12656/ 2014

22.09.2014- Appeal Disposed off in favour of Petitioner and High Court Instructed CBDT to extend due date to File Income Tax Return in Tax Audit Cases for A.Y. 2014-15  to 30.11.2014 but allowed to levy Interest U/s. 234A of the Income Tax Act,1961. Read More – Gujarat HC directs CBDT to extend due date of ITR Filing to 30.11.2014

19.09.2014 – Adjourned for further hearing to Monday 22.09.2014.

16.09.2014 –  On Request from CBDT Counsel Court Adjourned the matter for final hearing to 19th September 2014.

15.09.2014- In this case no hearing been taken place and case been adjourned to 16.09.2014.  The Reason for adjournment as per information available with us are 1. Absence of Senior Judge and 2. Non Appointment of any counsel to appear on behalf of CBDT/ UOI.  In Gujarat one more appeal been filed by All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants.

III. Mahesh Kumar And Company Vs. Union Of India & Anr. – W.P.(C)  5990/2014 (Delhi High Court)

23.09.2014 – Petitioner withdrawn the petition citing that they are not happy with affidavit. Petition dismissed as withdrawn.

22.09.2014- Court Adjourned the matter on request of petitioner to 23.09.2014.

19.09.2014 – case Adjourned to 22.09.2014 – Court Directs CBDT to file affidavit regarding non leviability of Penalty U/s. 271(1)(c) in case assessee revises returns filed on or before 30.09.2014.

18.09.2014-  Hourable Judges asked advocate from CBDT regarding the losses in case ITR due date is extended , which he was not able to reply, so the case been adjourned to 19.09.2014.

15.09.2014- During Hearing High Court has asked CBDT to file an Affidavit that Income Tax Return Filed without Tax Audit Report will not be defective in cases  where Tax Audit is applicable.  During Hearing CBDT has opposed the extension of due date of ITR arguing that Government may have to incur loss of Rs. 200/- crore per day if any extension for due date of ITR granted. Case is adjourned to 18th September for Next Hearing.

IV. The Chamber of Tax Consultants & Others Vs. Union of India (Bombay High Court),  WRIT PETITION (L)NO.2492 OF 2014

25.09.2014 – Bombay HC passed the order stating that CBDT to consider the representation of the of the Chamber before 30th September 204. Petitioners are entitled for better relief in view of decisions of other High Court if they are more favorable. Read More – Bombay HC ask CBDT to Consider Extension of ITR due Date to 30.11.2014

24.09.2014- After hearing for nearly three hours court adjourned the matter to 25.09.2014 at 11.00 A.M.

23.09.2014– Case adjourned to 24.09.2014

17.09.2014 – At the request of department counsel hearing is been adjourned to 23.09.2014.

15.09.2014 – Appeal Filed and  Listed for First Hearing on 17.09.2014.

V. Raj Tax Consultants Vs UOI And Ors (Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench), Civil Writ No. 9540/2014

24.09.2014 – Court Adjourned the matter to 26.09.2014

23.09.2014– Case adjourned to 24.09.2014

 19.09.2014 – Admitted and fixed for Final Hearing on 23.09.2014.

16.09.2014 –  Listed for First Hearing on 19.09.2014

VI. All India Federation of Tax Practitioners, G Baskar, an advocate and CNGSN & Associates Vs. CBDT (Madaras High Court)-

24.09.2014 – The Madras high court, in its interim order, passed on 24.09.2014 directed the CBDT to consider extension of the time for filing the income-tax return (ITR) to 30.11.2014. It has asked the CBDT to pass such an order of extension in the due date before 30.09.2014. Read More-  Madras HC Directs CBDT to extend due date of ITR to 30.11.2014

Author Bio

More Under Income Tax

Posted Under

Category : Income Tax (27209)
Type : Articles (16700) News (13555)

0 responses to “Status of ITR Due Date extension cases Pending before Various HCs”

  1. Adv. Rupesh Munot says:

    Due Date for filing of return of Income for Assessment Year 2014-15 Extended from 30th September, 2014 to 30th November, 2014 in Specified Cases (Extension for all purposes other than section 234A to 30/11/2014.) :

    As per the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), for an assessee, who is required to obtain Tax Audit Report (TAR) under section 44AB of the Act, the due date for furnishing his return of income is 30th September of the Assessment Year.

    The Central Board of Direct Taxes (‘the Board’) vide order dated 20th August, 2014 extended the due date for obtaining and furnishing of Tax Audit Report under section 44AB of the Act for Assessment Year 2014-15 from 30th September, 2014 to 30th November, 2014. Subsequently, a number of representations were received in the Board requesting for extension of the due date for furnishing of return of income also. Writ petitions were also filed in various High Courts for directing the Board to extend the due date for furnishing of return of income from 30th September, 2014 to 30th November, 2014 in conformity with the extension of the due date for filing of Tax Audit Report.

    The Gujarat High Court vide judgement dated 22.09.2014 directed the Board to extend the due date for furnishing the return of income to 30th November, 2014, except for the purposes of charging of interest under section 234A of the Act for late filing of return of income. Other High Courts also directed the Board to look into the practical difficulties of the petitioners and take a just and proper decision in this matter.

    In compliance to the judgments of various High Courts and after considering the representations received for extension of the due date, the Board, in exercise of its power conferred by section 119 of the Act, has extended the `due-date’ for furnishing return of income from 30th September, 2014 to 30th November, 2014 for the Assessment Year 2014-15 for all purposes of the Act in the case of an assessee, who is required to file his return of income by 30th September, 2014, and is also required to get his accounts audited under section 44AB of the Act or is a working partner of a firm whose accounts are required to be audited under section 44AB of the Act.

    There shall be no extension of the “due date” for the purposes of charging of interest under section 234A of the Act for late filing of return of income and the assessees shall remain liable for payment of interest as per the provisions of section 234A of the Act.

    For removal of doubt, it is clarified that for an assessee (other than working partner of a firm which is required to obtain and furnish Tax Audit Report), who is required to file its return of income by 30th September, 2014 but not required to obtain and furnish Tax Audit Report under section 44AB, the due date for furnishing of return of income for assessment year 2014-15 remains as 30th September, 2014.

    Source: Press Information Bureau, Government of India

  2. Adv. Rupesh Munot says:

    Due Date for filing of return of Income for Assessment Year 2014-15 Extended from 30th September, 2014 to 30th November, 2014 in Specified Cases (Extension for all purposes other than section 234A to 30/11/2014.) :

  3. CP Kulkarni says:

    Date extended to 30-11-2014, order available on pib.nic.in

  4. KANJI BHANUSHALI says:

    Friends,

    CBDT, after so much anxiety & suffering by many friends for so many days, has just issued a notification extending the filing due date for ITR also to 30/11/2014.

    Enjoy Navratri.

    T & R

    KP

  5. CA. Arul says:

    What is the moderator of taxguru.in doing ? Why is he allowing irrelevant postings to the topic ?

  6. R.C.Bagdi says:

    What is current status of due date of filling ITR

  7. B.S.K.RAO says:

    If CAs go on objecting for Profit & Loss A/c and Balance Sheet signed by Non-CA Tax Professionals in the course of audit of financial institutions, the day is not far that they will lose audit of financial institutions also.

  8. B S K RAO says:

    Madras Bar Association vs. UOI (Supreme Court – Full Bench)

    The NTT Act “crosses the boundary” & is unconstitutional. CAs/CSs are specialists on accounts & facts and are not capable of arguing/ deciding ‘Substantial Questions Of Law’

  9. B S K RAO says:

    ALL THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN CPC FOLLOWING IN APPEARANCE BEFORE TAX AUTHORITIES IN INDIA. OTHER THAN ADVOCATES SHOULD APPEAR BEFORE TAX AUTHORITIES UNDER CPC/EVIDENCE ACT ONLY, THAT TOO AGAINST SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE DEPTT.

  10. B S K RAO says:

    THERE IS NO OPTIONS AVAILABLE, MEMBERS OF ICAI (FINANCIALS) SHOULD CHANGE THEIR ATTITUDE & APPROACH. ACTIONS WITH GOOD INTENTION & MOTIVE WILL SUCCEED HAS BEEN PROVED BY “GREAT MA DURGA”.

  11. B S K RAO says:

    NOW “MONOPOLY JANE DO” AND “PRACTICE REHENE DO” SHOULD BE THE MANTRA OF ICAI (FINANCIALS) MEMBERS. FOR THIS TAX PRACTITIONERS BILL IS THE ONLY SOLUTION FOR THE PROBLEM. I HOPE THAT ALL NON-ADVOCATE TAX PROFESSIONALS WILL UNDERSTAND WHAT IS WHAT. SOME OF THE POINTS RAISED BY MANDEEP SING WERE ALSO DISCUSSED IN NTT JUDGMENT OF SC.

  12. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    MANDEEP SINGH Says: It is my old comment
    May 30, 2013 At 12:34 AM
    MR. BALU & ANAND JI,
    ADVOCATE ACT 1961 REGULATES PRACTICE OF LAW BEFORE COURTS & OTHER AUTHORITIES. PRACTICE OF LAW BY ONLY RECOGNIZED CLASS OF LAW PROFESSIONALS. IT IS ALSO A WELL SETTLED RULE EVERY LAW IS BASED ON ANOTHER LAW.
    INCOME TAX LAW ALSO BASED ON OTHER LAWS MENTIONED BELOW:-
    1 CPC 2. CRPC 3 EVIDENCE ACT 4 IPC SECTION 193 OF IPC BASED ON EVIDENCE ACT 5. LAND LAW OF CONCERNED STATE FOR PRACTICE OF LAW ON AGRICULTURE TAX MATTERS ETC.
    MERE “APPEARANCE” WORD IS NOT AMOUNTING TO “PRACTICE OF LAW” AS MENTIONED IN ADVOCATES ACT.SO FOR SECTION 288 OF IT ACT NOT GIVE FULL PLEDGED RIGHT TO NON ADVOCATES FOR PRACTICE OF LAW.
    – See more at: https://taxguru.in/chartered-accountant/tax-audit-incometax-actmonopoly-authority-causing-hurdle-voluntary-compliance.html#sthash.3DSL5FZG.dpuf

  13. nitin parbhakar says:

    Pls extend the date itr

  14. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    After the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in NTT. Now Chartered Accountants can’t represent assessee before Tax Tribunal.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Even the CBDT is hiding behind advocates by asking their advocates to request for adjournments.

  16. B.S.K.RAO says:

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday declared the National Tax Tribunal (NTT) unconstitutional.

    The tribunal was envisaged to function like National Green Tribunal (NGT) in the taxation field.

    A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice R M Lodha said that the Act passed by Parliament in 2005 is “unconstitutional” as the National Tax Tribunal (NTT) encroaches upon the power of higher judiciary, which can only decide issues involving substantial laws and not a tribunal.
    SC struck down several provisions of NTT Act, which were key to the legislation.

    Since the pith and substance of the Act has been found unconstitutional, the entire law needed to be struck down, the top court said.

    SC said the legislation was unconstitutional as it failed to transfer the convention and characters of an adjudicatory body, akin to judicial powers, to the NTT.

    SC also ruled that chartered accountants cannot represent a tax litigant in a revenue tribunal.

    The apex court passed the order on a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of NTT contending that there was a grave danger that judiciary will be substituted by a host of quasi-judicial tribunals which function as departments of various ministries.

    The first petition on the issue was filed in 2006 when the Madras Bar Association had challenged the setting up of NTT and later many other lawyers bodies followed suit.

    The NDA government had justified the creation of NTT, saying that the idea of creating tribunals was to unclog the backlog of cases in the high courts.

  17. B.S.K.RAO says:

    NATIONAL TAX TRIBUNAL STRUCK DOWN BY CONSTITUTION BENCH OF SC

  18. Anonymous says:

    Just a suggestion, appearing for cases in courts should not be a right given only to lawyers. That will solve the problem of long pendency of cases in the Judiciary.

  19. arvind shah says:

    some one commented that we have selected the government, no one should be blamed. The real fact is that the country is run or tortured by BABUS, who are not selected by us. They obtain power from president of india, over whom no one control. God also can not save the country from BABUS
    If CBDT IS right in estimating loss of rs200 crore per day, in that case the BABU do not respect such earning boy of rs 20

  20. arvind shah says:

    some one commented that we have selected the government, no one should be blamed. The real fact is that the country is run or tortured by BABUS, who are not selected by us. They obtain power from president of india, over whom no one control. God also can not save the country from BABUS

  21. CA Naveed Mulla says:

    The entire CA fraternity is eagerly waiting for the jusdgements of Honourable High Courts of Mumbai and Rest Of India

  22. B.S.K.RAO says:

    DEAR CA,

    Your comments that “Govt. fights for money. and Chartered Accountants or General Public fights for Justice and for genuine hardship. But I think we has choose this govt. so not to blem anyone”.

    In fact, assessess are facing following genuine troubles in giving compliance under Income-Tax Act.

    Due to T.D.Venkat Rao (SC)case only Chartered Accountant will conduct Tax Audit in Income-Tax Act. In view latest verdict in the case of Bar Council of India Vs A.K.Balaji (SC) Section 288(2) of Income-Tax Act require deletion. In the result only CAs will conduct Tax Audit & only Advocate will plead & act before the Income-Tax Authorities. Can any one imagine the ill effect of this situation to Govt. revenue & troubling assessees to approach more than one Tax Professional to give compliance
    under Income-Tax Act.

    On date, Assessee, Non-CA Tax Professionals & CAs should join hands to upload ITR in Tax Audit cases as per the software provided by the vendors Winman & Relyon to avoid repetitive job of filling Tax Audit Report. It is indicated in the e-filing portal of Income-Tax Deptt. that in future, Cost Audit Report, Report under Central Excise & Service Tax has to be uploaded. Ie, in future following persons with pass word for their respective DSC should join hands to upload Tax Audit cases

    1. Assessee
    2. Non-CA Tax Professional (Here DSC not required on date)
    3. Chartered Accountant
    4. Cost & Management Accountant
    5. Auditor Under Central Excise & Service Tax
    6. State VAT Auditor (If added in future)

    Above situation may cause further strict hurdle for voluntary compliance in Income-Tax Act in coming days. (Only solution is to delete all certificates in Income-Tax Act, 1961)

  23. Sa Accountants says:

    Any updation about Last date of filling ITR in the Audit case of F.Y.2013-2014

  24. PJ says:

    Any feedback on Delhi, Mumbai & Rajthan HC as all the hearings were today i.e. on 23-09-2014

  25. CA says:

    Govt. fights for money. and Chartered Accountants or General Public fights for Justice and for genuine hardship. But I think we has choose this govt. so not to blem anyone.

  26. M V S N SHARMA says:

    Tax Audit under section 44AB was introduced in finance Act 1984 with effect from AY 1985-86. This was done to thrust the inefficiency of the IT department on Tax Professionals.

    Most of the Assessees do not fight their cases with IT department when some amounts are added at the time of assessment as the Cost of fighting the case will be more than the tax involved. Some of the additions made are on flimsy grounds and no business organisation will be interested in using their employees time if the cost of fighting the case is more than the tax involved. This is the main reason many additions are accepted without any opposition. This surely is not the greatness of AO who adds certain amounts on some notional basis and neither it is not that Tax Audit Report is incorrect. Each case is different and unless the details of each case is known, no conclusion can be drawn on the additions made.

  27. Arun Dhawan says:

    Delhi Case withdrawn, guess due to saving a clash in judgement had DHC would have instructed otherwise as compared to GHC…

  28. Prakash Joglekar says:

    It is quite surprising that CBDT can take such action by extending ONLY date of Filling of Tax Audit report without extending the date of filling of return. How can any one is able to file return without completing the necessary audit required for filling of returns.
    Now wait and watch for today’s hearing in Delhi & Mumbai High Courts. After all CBDT has to issue order for the said extension. As normal practice of CBDT to extend the date on last day, which is of no use.

  29. Guvinder says:

    Any updates???????

  30. CA. Arul says:

    Any update ????

  31. Arun Dhawan says:

    Any update on the case front???

  32. B.S.K.RAO says:

    NSG SIR IS TOTALLY FRUSTRATED ABOUT THE ISSUE OF TAX AUDIT IN INCOME-TAX ACT AND LATEST DEVELOPMENT IN THE MATTER. 2014 IS THE LAST YEAR OF MONOPOLY OF CAS IN TAX AUDIT IS CLEAR FROM THE VIEW OF MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVT. OF INDIA. THE FACT IS ALSO CLEAR FROM THE MOVEMENT OF ICAI MEMBERS WHO ARE BUSY IN APPROACHING VARIOUS AGENCIES, MINISTRY & BUREAUCRATS.

  33. Anonymous says:

    Dear CAs and advocates,

    Please focus on the task on the topic that is due date of TAR/Income Tax Return. Instead of lawyers bashing CAs and vice versa.

  34. vijay says:

    any Update??????

  35. RiddhiSiddhi says:

    As far as tax audit report in Income Tax is concerned it is independent of Return filing process… It is optional AND NOT COMPULSORY to accept by assessee any comment made and/or dis-allowance of expenses stated in the tax audit report.. An assessee may dis-agree with any qualification made by auditor & he can file I.T. return without referring Income Tax Audit report..

    Tax Audit report u/s 44AB is purely for facilitating Assessing Offices to make assessment with/on the basis of his own expertise/knowledge & wisdom AND NOT TOTALLY ON THE BASIS OF TAX AUDIT REPORT U/S 44AB.

    Hence the importance of Tax Audit Report u/s 44AB is very less in the process of Income Tax Return Filing…

    Hence obtaining Income Tax Audit Report u/s 44AB is totally extra financial as well as physical burden on the Citizen of India…

  36. RiddhiSiddhi says:

    poor NSG!!!!!!!

  37. B S K RAO says:

    DEAR ALL TAX PROFESSIONALS,

    KINDLY POST MEANINGFUL COMMENTS HEREIN. BECAUSE, RECENTLY FINANCE MINISTRY HAS FORMED A MEDIA DIVISION TO KEEP TRACK OF PUBLICATIONS IN THE WEBSITE ABOUT THE ISSUES RELATING TO THE MINISTRY

  38. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    NSG sir,
    It is extremely very sorry to say that you don’t have any logic-able answer to my genuine questions. Your time become over to participate in this discussion on law point. illogical answers are wasting time of viewers. So for it is sorry to say that you should now quit the discussion on this matter. Sir I have already said number of times that I am only against injustice with indian businessman’s. I am satisfied with my own living standard. Please not take the matter in a fun & its a logical discussion.

  39. B S K RAO says:

    NSG SIR DO NOT POST MEANINGLESS COMMENTS, I HOPE THAT WHAT YOU SAID AS DREAM COME TRUE BY THE GRACE OF GOD. I ALSO HOPE THAT GOD WILL KEEP TRACK OF ALL WORK DONE BY NON-CA TAX PROFESSIONALS OF INDIA BY WAY OF REPRESENTATIONS IN THE MATTER & SUPPORT US IN BIG WAY. I ALSO THANK MY SUPPORTERS THROUGHOUT INDIA WHO ACCEDED TO WISH BY SENDING REPRESENTATION IN THE MATTER.

  40. NSG says:

    Mr.BSK RAO Sir

    I never noticed that you are one of the signatory to the E-FILING PROJECT AGREEMENT OF CBDT.Do you have any other classified documents of RAW or American or Israeli Intelligent Agencies.I know you have it.You obtained it through RTI application.Am I right?

    Now there is one more wonder in the world after TAJ MAHAL,Eiffel Tower etc.The name of new wonder is BSK RAO( ONE AND ONLY PERSON IN THE UNIVERSE WHO SEES HIS FACE WITHOUT THE ASSISTANCE OF MIRROR). Mr.BSK RAO,BEWARE……APPLE AND GOOGLE WILL KIDNAP YOU FOR THEIR FUTURE PROJECTS.

  41. NSG says:

    Dear Mr.Mandeep Singh

    I appreciate you for finding some of the reasons for the exchange rate fluctuation between rupee and US Dollar.BUT…Mr.Mandeep Singh ,still there exists number additional factors that contribute to the favorable/unfavourable fluctuations.Please seek the help of GOOGLE SEARCH GOD and copy and paste the same here.
    For the time being Dr. Raghuram Rajan is in place.Next Governor of RBI will be Mr.MANDEEP SINGH because of his skills to clinically analyse the economy and taxation system.VERY FUNNY

    Mr.Mmdeep Singh,I am afraid of you…because from today on wards,the appointing authority of auditor is not the board of dirctos/shareholders/concerned assessees.The appointing authority is MR. Mandeep Singh.Again and again you are very funny now a days.

  42. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    MR NSG SIR,
    we are not against any profession as already explained, I think you are commenting without any logic. Without given Answers to my genuine questions.For your kind information in courts now ” LOK ADALATS” are organised to solve the dispute of public with mutual consent of the parties.
    On the other hand you have accepted that ” LEGAL SYSTEM is complex one. Please tell me, why Non-Advocates are allowed to give legal advice on law point? Wrong legal advice by non Advocates can be cause of inconvenience” to the assessees. In recent case before INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL is a example for it.
    Instead of complicated legal system party can represent himself “In Person” before courts. WHY ON OTHER HAND ASSESSEES ARE NOT PERMITTED TO CERTIFY THERE OWN FINANCIAL DATA HIMSELF?
    Dear NSG sir, you don’t have any logic-able answer to my genuine questions. You didn’t answer my previous question, why same financial data examined again and again under INCOME TAX,VAT & SERVICE TAX etc separately under each act. Whether it is not extra financial burden on assessees ?

  43. B.S.K.RAO says:

    BCI ADVOCATE COUNCIL DOES NOT GIVE SELF APPRECIATING STATEMENT ? IN FACT COUNCIL WHICH FEEL THAT THEIR WORKS ARE NOT RECOGNISED BY PUBLIC GIVE SUCH SELF APPRECIATING STATEMENTS

  44. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    SIR
    TAX COLLECTION IS ALSO A MAIN SOURCE FOR ” REVENUE” TO OUR GOVERNMENT. On other hand these reports are barricade for ” REVENUE” collection. Definitely it is impact on indian currency.

  45. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Mr. NSG & Kris Sir,
    following reasons are main factor of fluctuation in indian Rupees. due to that our currency becomes weaken comparative to USA DOLLAR. Sir these reports are strict hurdle for Government Revenue due that inflation regularly increasing in india. Due that our RUPEE is weaken. I am not denied other factors also impact on weakness of INDIAN RUPEES BUT YOU CANN’T DENY ROLE OF THESE REPORTS to weak India Rupees. Please read below factors impact on our currency.

    Public Debt / Fiscal policy

    Whenever our Government fails to match expenses with equivalent revenue, there is a shortage of funds. To finance this, the Government at times opts to borrow money from institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF. This debt, accrued interests, and the payments made, also lead to currency fluctuations.

    Interest Rates

    The prevailing interest rates on the government bonds attract foreign capital to India. If the rates are high enough to cover the foreign market risk and if the foreign investor is comfortable with the fundamentals or credit ratings, money would start pouring into India and thus provide us with a supply of dollars.

    Sir PLEASE DONN’T MIND, NOW I THINK YOUR ARE NOT CAPABLE TO PERFORM ASSESSEES ACCOUNTS AUDIT.

  46. R S Saini says:

    An unwanted and unrealistic debates has started in all these matters. Every profession has it own dignity and responsibilities. Every profession has given this country something to be appreciated. And yes, there some laws which needs changes as per the current scenerio and economic conditions. The main issue is that the taxpayers should not be punished due to this all mess created by the incompetents.

  47. B.S.K.RAO says:

    NSG SIR, YOU WANT TO SEE THE E-FILING PROJECT AGREEMENT OF CBDT ?

  48. B.S.K.RAO says:

    NSG SIR, YOUR COMMENTS ARE DEGRADING CAS. BECAUSE, YOU CAN NOT SEE YOUR OWN FACE WITHOUT THE ASSISTANCE OF MIRROR.

  49. B.S.K.RAO says:

    I WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO THE KIND KNOWLEDGE OF MINISTRY OF FINANCE THAT IN B’LORE ONE CA HAS CHARGED RS 18 LAKHS FOR TAX AUDIT OF A COMPNAY CASE. THIS IS HOW THE TAX AUDIT CLAUSE HAS BEEN UTILIZED FOR MINTING MONEY.

  50. B.S.K.RAO says:

    NSG Sir Statement “You like people do not have any ABILITY, CAPACITY or MERIT even to talk about the Chartered Accountants” – Legally speaking Chartered Accountant can not work on any Indian Laws & liable for action both under ICAI Act & Advocates Act.

  51. B.S.K.RAO says:

    NSG Sir Statement “because it is a profession built up by efficient, dedicated, hard working and intelligent people” – Since past 30 years, TAR never served the purpose for which it was inserted. This is the out come of work by efficient, dedicated, hard working & intelligent people.

  52. NSG says:

    Mr.BSK RAO…….

    Are you threatening other professionals in the name of information obtained under RTI? Instead of BARKING in the TAX GURU, go and take action under the Income Tax Act or any other law for the time being in force against the defaulting members. Instead of opting legal measures, are you are trying to threaten the entire Chartered Accountant fraternity? MR.BSK RAO, some people failed in CA course because of their inefficiency and bad state of mind. As a matter of good spirit, such people should accept the failure. Instead of that, taking revenge against the ICAI is not a good attitude …….

    Man deep Singh may be a GOD FATHER to you and not to all. He is an RTI expert only for you like people. Other people are not obliged to follow Mr.Mandeep Singh. Our attitude towards Mandeep Singh will be subject specific. We have not appointed you to pronounce the qualities of Mandeep Singh.

    Mr.BSK RAO…….EVERY DOG HAS A DAY PROVIDED THE DOG IS NOT SELFISH, NOT BIASED AND DO NOT HAVE THE REVENGE ATTITUDE….………..OTHERWISE THE DOG ONLY BARKS……..You will not have a day unless you change dramatically. You clearly know that your actions and agitations are driven by your jealous towards chartered Accountants and your hidden business motive of obtaining the power to audit under the Income tax Act.

    IF you are not selfish and if you wish for the betterment of people, instead of dreaming section 44 AB and the fee thereof please spend some time to use your HIGH LEGAL SKILLS to find a solution to the following issues too….

    1. Speedy disposal of millions of cases pending in Indian Courts. Common man waiting even their entire life to get the verdict from the court even for a petty case.

    2. Prevention of corrupt practice by Some Advocates and Judges.

    3.For majority of Indians, Indian legal codes and justice system are too complex and very difficult to understand. Traditional method of conflict resolution in Panchayaths may be a good solution for the speedy disposal of disputes. This will save the money and time of common man

    Therefore.Mr.BSK RAO, if you have any balance time after SECTION 44AB DREAM, please consider the above issues too for our society.

  53. B.S.K.RAO says:

    NSG & KRISH SIR, IF YOU SEE THE REPLY RECEIVED FROM VARIOUS INCOME-TAX OFFICES THROUGHOUT INDIA BY MANDEEP SING, YOU CAN NOT IMAGINE THE EFFORT OF MANDEEP SING IN THE MATTER. PLEASE DO NOT SHOW YOUR STUNT BE PRACTICAL. SINCE PAST 30 YEARS OF RETAINING TAX AUDIT U/S 44AB NO SINGLE PURPOSE AS STATED IN CIRCULAR ISSUED FOR INSERTING TAX AUDIT OR E-FILING PROJECT AGREEMENT OF C.B.D.T. HAS BEEN SERVED. INSTEAD, THE CLAUSE HAS BEEN UTILISED AS ONE OF THE MAIN SOURCE OF MINTING MONEY FOR TAX AUDITOR. ICAI (FINANCIALS) HAS KEPT OUR ESTEEMED CENTRAL GOVT. IN DARK ROOM SINCE 30 YEARS. NOW, IT SEEMS GOVT. IS TRYING TO COME OUT OF DARK ROOM. PLEASE ALLOW IT TO COME OUT, WHY APPROACHING FM & PM AGAIN & AGAIN IN THE MATTER ?

  54. MB says:

    All comments are useless…. Professionals with different qualifications having same knowledge and expertise should stick to the topic of the debate rather than going into who is good and who is bad. Either CAs or Lawyers whom so ever should respect each others’ profession. After devoting lots of valuable time, is this what we have learnt out of our professional career ?? Pardon me if I am wrong.

  55. S.K. Chaudhuri says:

    I am a Tax Professional. As per my knowledge a Normal Return (with Tax Audit)can be filed even after 30.09.2014 and upto 30.11.2014 with Interest U/s 234A, if applicable. But Penalty U/s 271B is not applicable because 271B is related to Tax Audit but not with submission of Return. But in case of Loss Return we have to file on or before 30.09.2014 OR we have to wait for the decision of the Hon’ble High Courts and further Notification of CBDT. Am I correct ? Pl. Advise.

  56. B S K RAO says:

    NSG & KRISH SIR, IN FACT, I HAVE GOT COPIES OF REPLY RECEIVED BY MANDEEP SING ABOUT 95% OF ADDITIONS MADE ABOVE RS 2 LAKHS BY AO OF INCOME-TAX DEPTT. THROUGHOUT INDIA ARE TAX AUDIT CASES. WE CAN ALSO SEEK ACTION U/S 277A OF INCOME-TAX ACT IN ALL THOSE CASES & FILE CASE BEFORE COURT OF LAW FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. BUT, WE ARE NOT DOING IT, WE KNOW WHAT IS WHAT. THEREFORE YOU SHOULD APPRECIATE MANDEEP SING, INSTEAD COMMENTING HIM AS POOR MANDEEP SING. I ONCE AGAIN SUGGEST YOU BOTH TO IMPROVE YOUR LEVEL OF UNDERSTAND THE THINGS & DEVELOP BROAD MINDEDNESS.

  57. B S K RAO says:

    (1) ICAI (FINANCIALS) PUBLISH SELF APPRECIATING STATEMENT THAT THEIR MEMBERS POSSESS CORE COMPETENCE & EXPERTISE IN ALL MATTERS AND ALSO WORK PAR EXCELLENCE TO BUILD THE NATION.
    (2) ICAI (FINANCIALS) ALSO ISSUED GUIDANCE NOTE TO MEMBERS FOR ISSUE OF TAX AUDIT REPORTS.
    (3) MINISTRY OF FINANCE SHOULD PUT QUESTION TO ICAI (FINANCIALS) IN SPITE OF THE ABOVE WHY LEARNED AOS OF INCOME-TAX DEPTT. DETECT WRONG CLAIMS IN THE PROCESS OF SCRUTINY.

    NOW, MINISTRY SHOULD JUDGE THAT ICAI MEMBERS ARE EXPERT OR LEARNED OFFICIALS IN THE INCOME-TAX DEPTT. ARE EXPERTS. NSG & KRISH SIR PLEASE ANSWER THIS QUESTION THEN PROCEED FURTHER TO MAKE PERSONAL COMMENT ON MANDEEP SING JI. I AM OF THE STRONG VIEW THAT MANDEEP JI IS MOST LEARNED THAN ICAI MEMBERS, BECAUSE OF THE ABOVE SITUATION PREVAILING ON DATE.

  58. B S K RAO says:

    NSG & KRISH SIR, YOUR LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING THE THINGS IS VERY LOW. MANDEEP SING JI HAS PROVED BY MAKING RTI TO ALL AOS THROUGHOUT INDIA THAT 95% OF ADDITIONS ABOVE 2 LAKHS HAS BEEN MADE IN TAX AUDIT CASES. HERE THE QUESTION IS, IN SPITE OF GUIDANCE NOTE ISSUED BY ICAI WHY DEPTT. IS GETTING NIL & NA TAX AUDIT REPORT. IE, VERY PURPOSE OF SECTION 44AB TO ENABLE AO TO CONCLUDE QUALITY ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN STRUCK DOWN. WITHOUT GIVING REPLY TO THIS POINT YOU BOTH ARE TRYING TO DOWN GRADE HIM. THIS IS NOT CORRECT. HENCE, IMPROVE YOUR LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING THE THINGS. MANDEEP JI HAS PUT LOT OF EFFORTS TO COLLECT STATISTICS FROM INCOME-TAX DEPTT. THIS EFFORT HAS TO BE APPRECIATED.

  59. B S K RAO says:

    NSG & KRISH SIR, YOUR COMMENTS IN THIS BLOG INDICATES YOUR HIGH HEADEDNESS & MOTTO TO DOWN GRADE OTHERS – YOU WILL GET LESSON FOR THE SAME. EVERY DOG WILL HAVE ITS OWN DAY

  60. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    NSG Sir,
    I think we can be best friends, whenever we shall met personally. But all of you have to common problem,you don’t want to accept the truth. Sir, I am not interested to audit the accounts of assessees. But I am always against injustice with any person.

  61. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Mr.Krish & NSG sir,
    Lets we accepted your opinion that I am not capable for that. What will do say about capability of those 70 to 90 % Chartered Accountants, who conducted tax audit u/s 44AB & 95% cases selected under scrutiny and addition more than 2 lacs in those cases. In Non audit additions hardly 5%.
    You also didn’t give answer to my question, what is need to verify same financial data under different acts again & again?

  62. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Krish Sir, please tell me your parameter to judge a persons professional capability & core competence. As per my knowledge persons with more capability will plan tax to extract more fees, leaving nothing to Govt. exchequer.

  63. S PRAKASH says:

    The time of courts and judges are wasted on a small matter which the government would have taken a wise decision just by extending the applicability of the new form from the next assessment year.This is how we work and this is how the CBDT is working and hence the direct tax collection has not reached to the target of the government when compared to the economic development in the country and indirect taxes are occupying the important role and right time to concentrate on GST.

  64. Krish says:

    Mandeep Ji

    Sir,I am also not against any profession.I dont see anything wrong in your demand of allowing other professionals to do audit,provided the other professionals who makes the demand allow CAs in their respective areas.Then whoever has quality will rise up in their respective core competence.

    But seeing your analysis and your comments ,I dont think you are capable of that.

  65. NSG says:

    Mr.Mandeep Singh

    What happened to you? Do you have any mania? Take immediate steps to cure the problem. You really have a new mania of “Jealous of Chartered Accountants”. It appears from your various comments in TAX GURU that your motto of life is only the destruction of Chartered Accountancy profession. In the name of protection of tax payers, really you are trying to degrade the CA profession. You like people do not have any ABILITY, CAPACITY or MERIT even to talk about the Chartered Accountants because it is a profession built up by efficient, dedicated, hard working and intelligent people. The Government, business men and other stakeholders of the society know the importance and significance of this great profession. We don’t need the approval or degree from you like selfish and narrow minded people.

    You are really funny. According to you, exchange rate fluctuation of Rupee against Dollar is because of ICAI. Mr.Mandeep Singh, please study the basics of finance and economy to UNDERSTAND the factors which contributes to Exchange Rate fluctuations. Tomorrow, you will even say that the political unrest and terrorism problem in Pakistan is because of Indian Chartered Accountants. Really funny you are……….

    Mr.Mandeep Singh, please approach various debates in an impartial and unbiased manner.Then only people will give your comments due consideration.
    Don’t Act as a dummy of BSK Rao and please develop an identity of your own.

  66. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Mr Krish ji,
    I also understand the gravity of the issue. Only solution for it please file PIL to delete provisions of section 44AB of Income tax for reports. For the betterment of revenue of our country & to protect fundamental rights of our business regarding financial exploitation.
    Sir as per information received from various income tax offices. 95% cases are audited u/s 44AB, In Which cases department made additions more than two lacs. What is need to file present PIL. Regarding quality of audit cases department knows very well so for CBDT has given option to file return without audit their accounts.

  67. vijaykumar says:

    This Audit report of CAs are for what purpose?, if they not performing their duties as per the norms. Business class only getting headache with the audit report of CAs, and government losing taxes due to their mannipulated tax evation practice. In this two years how many CAs are disqualified for tax practice. Remember the TDS Scandals.

    Mr.B.S.K.Rao’s comments is true, there is lot of non CA tax practitioners in India with good knowledge. Dont consider them as fools.

    There is also computerised audit system to CBDT. They want to develop it just like Vat E-filing method, so each and every accountant can submitt correct datas to the Department.Insist Audit reports of CAs to Companies, Banks and other public institutions only. Tax collection will increase in this method

  68. B S K RAO says:

    NSG SIR, NON-CA TAX PROFESSIONALS THROUGHOUT INDIA WAKE-UP THROUGHOUT INDIA AGAINST THE WRONGFUL ACTION OF ICAI (FINANCIALS). IT IS WRONG ON YOUR PART COMMENT THAT THEY ARE IGNORANT OF ISSUES PREVAILING ON DATE.

  69. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    MR Krish ji,
    I am not against any profession and not against any CA’s. I am against of that policies, which protects the interest of only specific group of persons. Due to that we are loosing revenue in Crores. Which makes worse impact on our economy.
    It is well settled rule in Income tax there should be no double taxation. Can you tell me why our businessman’s are spending money seprately for examine of same financial data under different acts. Can you give me logic ?. Do you not thing it is inserted with a motive to give employment for specific group of persons against interests of our country.

  70. Gautam says:

    Even ITR Forms comes too late.. Every yr… Without any reason

  71. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Indian Rupee and its exchange rate historically –
    1947- 1.00 Indian Rupees to 1 American dollar
    1950 – 4.79 Indian Rupees to 1 American dollar
    1955 – 4.79 Indian Rupees to 1 American dollar
    1960 – 4.77 Indian Rupees to 1 American dollar
    1965 – 4.78 Indian Rupees to 1 American dollar
    1970 – 7.56 Indian Rupees to 1 American dollar
    1975 – 8.39 Indian Rupees to 1 American dollar
    1975 – 8.39 Indian Rupees
    1980 – 7.86 Indian Rupees

    1985 – 12.36 Indian Rupees
    1990 – 17.50 Indian Rupees
    1995 – 32.42 Indian Rupees
    2000 – 44.94 Indian Rupees
    2000 – 44.94 Indian Rupees
    2005 – 44.09 Indian Rupees
    2010 – 44 to 50 Indian Rupees.
    2013 – 68.80

    Mr. NSG SIR,
    It is a result of policies, which were made for members of specific professional body by adopt total ignorance our country & its businessman’s interests. you can see result of policies introduced in 1984, which badly worst our economy.
    Now you will make what is relation of Reports with our economy ?
    Ans:- After 1984 to protect the interests of specific persons. Our country
    loosed huge revenue due to that day by day our economy condition worsed compared to other developed countries.Till Today we loosing huge revenue as earlier explained by Sh. BSK RAO JI. WE ARE SHOWING JUST ONLY .50% TO RS.3% NET PROFIT WITH CONDITION THAT ASSESSEE HAVE OBTAINED AUDIT REPORT FROM CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT. ON OTHER HAND WE EXPECT MINIMUM NET PROFIT 8% FROM ASSESSEES.

  72. NSG says:

    Dear Mr.mandeep singh

    Are you surprised about the Government policies? Your comments amount government policies and taxation clearly reveals that you are totally ignorant of Indian economy and its financial system.YOU ARE ACTING LIKE A SALES REPRESENTATIVE …..begging opportunities for Advocates.Mr.Mandeep please do not degrade the Advocates by making such comments.Mr.IGNORANT MANDEEP SINGH stop this type of comments……

  73. Madhav says:

    There won’t be any loss to Government (they have claimed Rs.200 Cr per day loss), rather, those delaying remittance of tax would be paying 234B interest at a rate higher than that used for calculation of loss per day. Thus Government would gain on account of delay by any tax payer to pay the tax due to extension of time.

  74. RiddhiSiddhi says:

    Severe fall in standards of CA profession – ITAT

    Vijay V Meghani vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai), I.T .A. No. 5418 and 5419 / Mum/2011

    – See more at: https://taxguru.in/income-tax-case-laws/severe-fall-standards-ca-profession-improper-advice-ca-ground-condonation-delay-appeal-itat.html#sthash.L07GoBNA.dpuf

  75. NSG says:

    Mr.BSK RAO

    DREAM…DREAM…..DREAM…….no cost for that…..

  76. VENKATESH.U.D, says:

    CBDT COMPLICATING THE ISSUE OF TAX AUDIT WILL ULTIMATELY BENEFIT CA COMMUNITY BY WAY OF CHARGING MORE FEES TO THEIR CLIENTS. ULTIMATELY NON-CAS WHO ARE IN BETWEEN CAS & ASSESSES ARE AFFECTED

  77. B S K RAO says:

    Krish Sir,

    Mandeep ji is raising the genuine issue in tax compliance which needs early redrassal. Ministry of Finance has also realized the issue. Monopolistic era of CAs in Tax Practice will end in 2014. Just wait & watch.

  78. Krish says:

    Poor Mandeep Singh is always in the forum commenting on all the issues related to CAs and shouting (ie Capital Letters) .Sir please dont belittle yourself by making unnecessary comments on all the issues without understanding the gravity of the issue or the efforts put in by the involved parties.This is a professional forum and keep that status if you are a member of any profession.

  79. NSG says:

    Dear Mr.Mandeep singh…

    Why we need Advocates and Courts ?……

  80. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    I am always surprised from the policies of our government regarding financial audit under INCOME TAX, VAT & SERVICE TAX etc.

    DAY BOOK,CASH BOOK,LEDGER & STOCK registers are maintained regarding financial data of any business. Till today, I am not understand what is need of separate audit regarding same financial data under different tax acts. What is motive behind it of our government, ministry of finance & ICAI for given such kind advice . What is need to verify same books again & again under different tax acts.

    NOW QUESTION ARISES WHETHER OUR GOVERNMENT’s MAIN INTENTION BEHIND IT TO OBTAIN PROPER COMPLIANCE FROM ASSESSEES REGARDING TAX LAWS THAN IT IS NOT A ” AUDIT”. IT IS A LEGAL OPINION ON TAX LAWS AND CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO GIVE LEGAL OPINION ON TAX LAWS. IF THEY DOING THAN IT WILL BE CALLED AS” UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW”

  81. R S Saini says:

    Many congrates to fellow brothers who are taking pain on lacs of assessees. This is a fit case of these govt. institution to do things without any insenstivity. They should realise and act responsibly.

  82. NAGESH says:

    Better file the returns in November along with interest/s U/ss. 234A and 234B. Since the Tax audit report is made very complicated, better, file carefully along with the return. I do not find any rationale in asking CBDT to file an affidavit that the return filed with out TAR would not be defective by the Hon’ble Delhi High court. This is because unless the audit is concluded it is not possible to compute the income and file the return. So both the return and Audit report must go together. Even if the return is not defective with out TAR, in my view it is not advisable to file the return with out TAR. The problem arises in Loss cases, if due date is not extended as the losses would not be allowed to be carried forward, unless filed before due date. So be careful in filing the loss returns and rest can be filed at a later date. We do not understand why every year some confusion arises just before filing of returns? From one side, the departments asks their officers to be user-friendly. Is this approach appearing to be user friendly?

  83. Sukhpreet Singh says:

    As 90% of TAX due is taken as advance tax in all cases, in the year of earning itself. How they come up with the loss of Rs. 200 crore a day. This is very nominal amount of Rs. 12000/- crore in two months as compare to Rs.500000/- crore direct tax kitty. Govt will also interest on this amount also, if assessee pays full & final amount as self assessment tax on date of filing itself. Rs. 200 crore of loss is which nature can explain any one ………..

  84. FCA Manish Jogiram Agrawal says:

    Best Way to Avoid all Contraversies.. One may go for Filing ITR by determining Zero Self Assessement Tax(Neither Claiming Refund Nor Paying Self Asstt. Tax) by checking (Tick Mark) on WHETHER AUDIT HAS BEEN CONDUCTED – NO … By aggregating All Expenses in OTHER EXPENSES without giving details of AUDIT FEES PROVISION+DEPRECIATION .. JUST Determine Income which concludes a Tax equal to Your Advance Tax Paid. Generate the XML and Upload the ITR before 30/09/2014, But well in advance atleast 7 days before Due Date 30/09/2014.
    Otherwise… Tomorrow how you will take a stand That You have conducted Tax Audit U/s 44AB to Avoid Penalty U/s 271 B for Non-Conduct of Tax-Audit U/s 44AB.

  85. sHAILESH Dobariya says:

    CBDT should accept its mistake by extension of ITR Due Date.

  86. SRINIVASAN says:

    Thanks for the informations sir. But now the case is adjourned to 18th Sept

    and as usual finalisation will be given around 29th Sep. without any use to

    our anxiety, tension and worries.

  87. Amit Somaiya says:

    Dear Professional freinds ,

    We can file ‘NIL’ return by 30-09-2014 and will revise it in November . So no defective return & can carry forward losses .

    Correct me ,if I m wrong .

    Amit

  88. Hardik Kakadiya says:

    During Hearing High Court has asked CBDT to file an Affidavit that Income Tax Return Filed without Tax Audit Report will not be defective in cases where Tax Audit is applicable…

    If this is so, let the assessee file “0” based ITR with 0s everywhere, claiming TDS, Advance Tax, SA Tax etc. This return would also not be defective..? lolz. And anyways real data would be poured in by the assessee once the Auditor provide their comments and finalize the audit report with audited balance sheet and profitability statement.

    In absence of audited details, the assessee would be filing a provisional balance sheet and profitability statement…

  89. KANJI BHANUSHALI says:

    Friends, if at all date for ITR for Audit cases is not extended, then there is no cause for big worry, of course, in most of the cases.

    We can’t file ITR without TAR. So, if at all I file ITR in the month of Nov 2014, then ITD (1) will charge Interest for Late filing & (2) will not allow C/F of Losses. That’s all.

    T & R
    KP

  90. vijaykumar says:

    If the CBDT wish to collect tax in proper time, they can insist it in the manner of a fixed percentage of tax on the total turnover (in the manner of advance income tax payments). and rest balance will remitt with ITR &TAR with a due date of every year December 31st. So the difficulties of Businessclass, Professionals and public will solve, and the government will get tax in time
    I prefered Dec 31st because the government need to collect financial datas for the coming year,s budget preparation

  91. satish boob says:

    admission of various cases,asking for affidavit by court ,itself indicates that there is merit in filing various writs.

  92. Annugarg says:

    High court should extend the due date of ITR along with tax audit report because ITR is filed with the help of Tax audit report

  93. CA Moiz Lokhandwala says:

    With regard to hearing of Mahesh Kumar & Co. v/s. UOI, it surprised to learn that CBDT is against extension of ITR arguing loss to exchequer of Rs. 200 crore per day if extension is granted.Then they should have taken this in their wisdom before revising TAR. When it took such a long time for learned CBDT to notify and revised TAR and make available the utility after passing of Finance Act 2014, what they expect the Auditor and Assessee to be? It means that to avoid lossess, it is expected from assessee to file their returns ignoring the comments of Auditor altogether. Then, Audit u/s. 44AB doesnot serve any purpose.

  94. Ajay M says:

    Not sure how Government would loose Rs. 200 crores per day by postponing the date of filing the Returm of Income — as presented by CBDT in Delhi High Court case of Mahesh Kumar & Co. In all probability, all assessees would have paid their taxes by March itself and even if there are some taxes payable, Government would earn interest on delayed payments.

  95. Dipak J Shah says:

    Through this column I congrats to R M Shah. He is a fine man and ethical standards are high than I have seen in many C A in Ahmedabad.
    Shah D J

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *