- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Filing physical tax audit reports impractical: CBDT tells High Court
Filing physical tax audit reports impractical: CBDT tells High Court Chartered accountants have highlighted the difficulties faced due to the technical glitches in the IT e-filing portal The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has told the Gujarat High Court that physical filing of the tax audit reports and Income Tax (IT) Returns is not feasible. A petition filed by the...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Filing physical tax audit reports impractical: CBDT tells High Court
Chartered accountants have highlighted the difficulties faced due to the technical glitches in the IT e-filing portal
The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has told the Gujarat High Court that physical filing of the tax audit reports and Income Tax (IT) Returns is not feasible.
A petition filed by the Southern Gujarat Income Tax Bar Association sought to submit physical copies of the tax returns and audit reports. The petition also requested to extend the submission date for the same. It pursued not to levy interest or penalty on the belated filings owing to glitches in the IT e-portal.
Recently, the tax department had extended the submission dates for filing of IT returns and audit reports for the assessment year 2021-22.
Various groups of chartered accountants filed representations highlighting the difficulties faced in e-filing the tax reports due to the technical glitches in the portal.
On behalf of CBDT, senior advocate Manish Bhatt informed that, unlike the Goods and Services Tax (GST) returns, physical filing of tax audit reports and income tax returns would not be possible, as the e-portal captures only digital figures.
Moreover, the portal had helpline numbers along with a multi-layered grievance cell. If any taxpayer was facing technical issues with the portal, he could contact the helpline, he said.
However, a bench headed by Justice J B Pardiwala stated, "The helpline is not helping. That is what the petitioners are saying."
"As a writ court, we are finding it difficult to tell the ministry to accept returns in a manual (physical) form. It is a policy decision," the court maintained.