AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner assessee has filed this petition as a public interest litigation.
In pursuance of the order passed by this Court dt. 18th Sept., 2007, learned Counsel for respondents Mr. Bissa submitted that till today, the Department has not filed any SLP though it may be under process.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is using Saral 2D Forms since years and the change made by the Department is contrary to Section 139. The learned Counsel has relied on the decision of the Allahabad High Court in Om Prakash Tewari and Others Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others, wherein in para 10 the Allahabad High Court observed as under:
The petitioner have alleged that the impugned r. 12 of the IT Rules, 1962, as amended by the IT (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2007, is ultra vires to the provisions of Section 139 of the IT Act as Section 139 of the IT Act requires the assessee to file along with return certain documents. The petitioners have also alleged that by insertion of Section 139C of the IT Act, unfettered powers have been given to the CBDT, which are contrary to the provisions of the IT Act.
On the other hand learned Counsel for the respondents Mr. Bissa relied on the judgment of Gujarat High Court in All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants and Others Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others, and submitted that the Gujarat High Court has disposed of the matter while holding as under:
Considering the submissions, we direct-the Department to accept the return which are submitted by the taxpayers, subject to the genuine difficulty. After acceptance of those return forms, on scrutiny if it is found by the concerned officer that there was no genuine difficulty on the part of the taxpayer in giving the details required in various columns, finally those forms may be treated as not filled as required, and they will be subject to final decision taken by the concerned officer. However, it is made clear that if under the rules no Annexures are required to be attached, no Annexures shall be attached to the return form.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case and the issue involved, in our view no prejudice is going to be caused to the Department if the assessees are allowed to submit Saral 2D Forms for the concerned assessment year as the one High Court has already given such directions.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is admitted. Notices after admission need not be issued to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 as Mr. Bissa accepts the same on their behalf.
Meanwhile by way of interim relief it is directed that if the returns are filed by the assessees of the State by submitting Saral 2D Forms, the same shall be entertained by the IT authorities and the same shall not be rejected on the ground that the same are not in the prescribed new forms.
List the matter for final hearing in the third week of January, 2008.