The Mid-year introduction of New formats of Tax audit reports and further extension of date of Tax audit report without extending the date of filing of return has created a lot of controversy and in this respect two writ petitions have been filed in Hon. Delhi high court and Hon. Gujarat High Court by CA Mahesh Kumar and CA Rajni Shah respectively and both are coming up for hearing on 15th Sept 2014.
CA Sudhir Halakhandi has talked with both of them with respect to the matter under consideration which is being produced for the benefit of readers.
1. CA SUDHIR HALAKHANDI:-
Sir, what was the motivating factor behind filing the writ in Hon. High Courts with respect to tax audit report and Income tax return.
CA MAHESH KUMAR:-
The order of the CBDT under section 119 itself is a motivation because it is a defective order and I can’t expect this type of order from a lawmaking responsible authority like CBDT. My personal opinion is that one cannot file the ITR without completion of audit. Somebody should come forward and take on this at right forum so after reading this order, my opinion was “it is enough” so the result is this writ.
CA RAJNI SHAH:-
My main motivating factor was self belief and also belief in Indian Judiciary too. I was shocked to know that the biggest administrative body CBDT acted without considering hardship to the people at large. Further once notification about new TAR was introduced a representation was made to extend due date of filing of return also but in vein. Hence it was decided by me to approach Hon. Gujarat High Court for such a small but very important matter.
2. CA SUDHIR HALAKHANDI:-
Sir, What are the chances that the case will be decided on 15/09/2014 and further what type of relief you have asked from the Hon. Court in this respect since the date 30/09/2014 is very near.
CA RAJNI SHAH:-
I have full faith in Indian Judiciary System and also in readiness on the part of the Courts in understanding the problems on hand. In the instant case the due date of filing of returns is 30th September 2014 and if the writ is not decided at the earliest, it will be irrelevant. I have asked for extension of due date for filing of return in line with extension of date for obtaining TAR. Also it is requested to defer new TAR for one more year. I may also plead before Hon., Court for a direction or instruction to CBDT and other Government agencies to introduce and implement all new forms, utilities etc. well in advance and all stake holders must be taken into confidence.
CA MAHESH KUMAR:-
Yes In my opinion the case should take a definite positive conclusion on that day and the date 30/09/2014 is very near so we should get relief as early as possible. As far as relief is concerned I have asked for deferment of the fresh formats to assessment year 2015-16 and further extension of date of ITR. The matter is in the court so we can only hope for the best in the interest of Trade, industry and the profession since my concern for these sections of society is equal.
3. CA SUDHIR HALAKHANDI:-
Sir, are you satisfied with the stand taken and declared by the ICAI in the matter of extension of TAR date without extending the date of ITR.
CA MAHESH KUMAR:-
Not at all , ICAI should have taken more strong steps in these type of situations and in my opinion in the audit matters CBDT should have consulted ICAI which is also an organisation established under Act of parliament so instead of taking sudden decision it should be introduced by taking ICAI into confidence . If this has not done by CBDT then ICAI should have taken the strong steps like me for the better interest of trade, industry and the profession. I think as apex body of auditors ICAI should consolidate it’s power which is lying in us i.e. in the members and instead of just making representations should Act strongly against such type of unreasonable decisions of Lawmakers.
CA RAJNI SHAH:-
Frankly Yes and No. yes because at least ICAI made a representation in the matter. But no because at such high level, the request must be specific to be made before Government. ICAI asked for deferment of TAR for one year. But alternatively requested to extend date for TAR only and not for due date for filing of due date. Even after this controversial notification was interpreted to show that the due date of TAR is extended and not for filing the ROI, ICAI did not do the needful.
4. CA SUDHIR HALAKHANDI:-
What is your opinion about Midyear introduction of the fresh formats of the TAR and is this a good practice?
CA MAHESH KUMAR:-
This is not a good practice and should be discouraged and I have taken this in my writ also prominently and these types of practices are undesirable practices and should be countered from every front. This is my firm opinion and it will stand on it throughout my life.
CA RAJNI SHAH:-
CBDT (Government) has inherent powers to introduce new forms and / or amend existing ones. However it is not a good practice to simply throw the new forms or utilities suddenly and then go on revising the same once defects are observed. For such a large civilised country such trial and error method on the part of Government is not good for either party. This is happening year after year and in last year the TAR utility was amended as many as 13 times. In my view the new forms or utility must be tested in depth and then only introduced. Even the format of ITRs are filnalised very late and hence there is hardly any time left before due date of filing of returns.
BY CA SUHDIR HALAKHANDI
Thanks a lot to both of you sirs.
CAclubindia
