BusinessTop News

Non-filing of ITR: Madras HC places onus on taxpayer

 

Paying earnings tax however not submitting earnings tax return will price you dearly because the Madras Excessive Courtroom has held that the burden lies on the assessee to point out that he had no wilful intention to not file the return.

Accordingly, the Courtroom has dominated continuation of prosecution on this matter. Specialists advise that each tax payer should take full duty in submitting returns.

A single choose bench of the Courtroom, comprising Justice CV Karthikeyan highlighted ruling by the Supreme Courtroom (Sasi Enterprises vs Assistant Commissioner of Earnings Tax), the place it was clearly acknowledged that submitting the return throughout the stipulated and obligatory interval is an obligation forged on any one who has to declare the earnings.

The bench famous that the petitioner had laid the blame on his earlier employer stating that there was a mismatch within the earnings earned as given in type 16 and as uploaded in type 26AS. It had additionally been acknowledged that this was not delivered to the data of the petitioner since he had left employment. It was additionally acknowledged that although the present trigger notices had been acquired, he was beneath the bona fide impression that since tax had been paid, no additional motion is required from his finish.

The bench held that if the taxpayer is liable to file his return then he ought to file it throughout the stipulated timeline u/s 139(1). Additional, he can not lay the blame on his earlier employer by stating that every one taxes have been duly paid and assume that his erstwhile employer would have filed the return. Additional, this can’t be handled as a bona fide mistake and it can’t be presumed that he has no intention of committing any offence.

“The burden lies on the assessee to point out that he had no wilful intention to not file the return. Any clarification to discharge such burden could be examined solely through the course of the trial,” the bench stated. Additional it talked about that it can not presume that the petitioner is harmless of any of the offences complained. “It’s for the petitioner to determine such innocence,” the bench stated whereas issuing a path to the Further Chief Metropolitan Justice of the Peace for graduation of trial and full by January 22 subsequent 12 months.

Compliance vital

Om Rajpurohit, Director (Company & Worldwide Tax) with AMRG stated it will have a broad affect on the society as a result of many taxpayers are usually not severe about submitting returns and imagine that if taxes are paid, they might be capable to keep away from prosecution. So, “even when taxes are paid, it’s advisable to adjust to tax provisions and file the return of earnings by the due date as prescribed by u/s 139(1) of the Earnings Tax Act with a purpose to forestall prosecution,” he stated.

Shailesh Kumar, Associate, Nangia & Co LLP stated that courts aren’t any extra benevolent for ignorance of legislation. If required as per legislation, submitting of return is obligatory and no taxpayer can argue that his duty to file the return of earnings was delegated and name it a bona fide mistake. “It’s the responsibility of each one who has to declare the earnings and ensure his ITR is duly filed as per legislation. Additionally, the tax authorities have an authority to presume that Assessee has a culpable psychological state and it’s for the Assessee to show his innocence,” he stated.


Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back to top button