CWP No.19770 of 2015 1 IN HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.19770 of 2015 Date of decision: September 29, 2015 Vishal Garg and others Petitioners Union of India and another ..Respondents CORAM: HON BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to Reporters or not? 3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest? Present: Mr. Hitesh Kaplish, Advocate for petitioners. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate for respondents. Ajay Kumar Mittal,J. 1. petitioners impugn Press Release dated 9.9.2015, Annexure P.1 whereby respondents have taken decision not to extend date for filing of returns due by 30.9.2015 for assessment year 2015- 16 for certain categories of assessees including companies, firms and individuals engaged in proprietary business/profession etc. whose accounts are required to be audited in terms of Section 44AB of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, Act ). 2. few facts relevant for decision of controversy involved as narrated in petition may be noticed. petitioners are practicing Chartered Accountants and are based at Chandigarh and different places in State of Punjab. According to petitioners, as per Section GURBAX SINGH 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 2 139(1) of Act, income tax return of every financial year ending on 31st of March is to be filed by due dates fixed. forms under which respective categories of tax payers are required to file their returns have to be duly made available to said categories of tax payers on very first day of assessment year so that every tax payer has sufficient time to file income tax return in prescribed format. However, respondents knowing well essence of time in filing income tax return failed to notify prescribed income tax return forms for concerned categories of tax payers. Further, respondents notified income tax return forms for all types of assessees at belated stage on different dates. On account of said delay on part of respondents in notifying said forms, tax payers of concerned categories suffered grave prejudice as due to same, forms were not available to said categories of tax payers as on 1.4.2015. respondents issued Press Release dated 9.9.2015, Annexure P.1 not to extend date for filing return from 30.9.2015 for certain categories of assessees including companies, firms and individuals engaged in proprietary business/profession etc. whose accounts are required to be audited in terms of Section 44AB of Act. Aggrieved thereby, petitioners are before this court through instant writ petition with prayer for extension of due date for filing income tax returns. 3. We have heard learned counsel for parties. 4. Learned counsel for petitioners inter alia submitted that it was only after 1.8.2015, 2.8.2015 and 7.8.2015 that income tax return Forms No. 4, 5 and 6 respectively were available for downloading by assessees. In such circumstances, last date fixed for e-filing of income GURBAX SINGH 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 3 tax return for assessment year 2015-16 by assessees, being 30.9.2015 is unreasonable and is liable to be extended. 5. On 24.9.2015, learned counsel for revenue produced copy of communication dated 23.9.2015 received from Central Board of Direct Taxes wherein while supporting Press Release dated 9.9.2015, Annexure P.1, it has been inter alia stated that in assessment year 2015- 16 as compared to earlier assessment year, only some minor modifications have occurred in ITR 5, 6 and 7 forms and relevant scheme. Therefore, there does not exist any greater compliance burden on tax payers this year as compared to earlier year. It has been further stated that in last two years, Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) got representations from various stakeholders mentioning that some tax payers were finding it difficult to upload audit report because of newly introduced e-filing system as well as frequent changes in e-filing utility. After due consideration of various representations and keeping in view fact that e-filing of audit report had been made mandatory for first time and some difficulties were being encountered in e-filing of audit reports for assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 by tax payers, CBDT invoked its powers under Section 119 of Act to extend due date. 6. During course of hearing on 24.9.2015, following two questions were put to learned counsel for revenue:- i) As to why Forms No.4, 5 and 6 were not prescribed before 7th August 2015 when same are required to be appended alongwith e-filing of return under Section 139D of Income Tax Act, 1961? ii) Has any assessee in this category filed return before 7th August 2015? If yes, whether assessee is required to file fresh return after format of audit report has been GURBAX SINGH 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 4 prescribed by 7th August, 2015, as Form No.4 was available on 1st August 2015, Form No.5 was available on 2.8.2015 and Form No.6 was available on 7th August 2015? Learned counsel for revenue submitted that only minor changes had been made in aforesaid forms. However, she prayed for time to file reply. Consequently, case was adjourned to 28.9.2015. 7. On 28.9.2015, written statement on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 was filed in Court which has been taken on record. arguments were concluded and case was fixed for 29.9.2015 for orders. 8. In reply filed, it has been inter alia stated that no averment has been made by petitioners as to statutory mandate being violated or rules not being followed or any specific violation of any statutory rights. Further, factual position for filing of returns in instant year is totally different from last year. 9. only question that arises for consideration in this case is whether keeping in view facts and circumstances of case and genuine hardship of assessees, date for filing of returns for assessment year 2015-16 for certain categories of assesses including companies, firms etc. whose accounts are required to be audited in terms of Section 44AB of Act, is to be extended beyond 30.9.2015. 10. Learned counsel for petitioners during course of hearing also produced copy of representation sent to Finance Minister, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi requesting for extension of due date for filing tax audit report and income tax return for assessment year 2015-16 for assessees referred to in clause (a) of Explanation 2 to Section 139(1) of Act from 30th September 2015 to atleast 31st of October 2015. Further in office memorandum dated GURBAX SINGH 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 5 24.9.2015 issued by Government of India, Ministry of Finance, department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes, with reference to observations of this Court, it has been inter alia stated as under:- Since returns in ITR 4, 5 and 6 were mandatory required to be e-filed, no assessees in these categories could have filed their returns of income for assessment year 2015-16 before 1st, 2nd and 7th August 2015 respectively. copy of document from website of income tax department containing Form 3CD on which audit report was required to be filed was also produced by learned counsel for petitioners. There were certain modifications made on 24.9.2015 itself. 11. At this stage, it would be expedient to consider certain statutory provisions as are relevant for decision of controversy involved which read thus:- 139. (1) Every person, (a) being company or firm; or (b) being person other than company or firm, if his total income or total income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under this Act during previous year exceeded maximum amount which is not chargeable to income-tax, shall, on or before due date, furnish return of his income or income of such other person during previous year, in prescribed form and verified in prescribed manner and setting forth such other particulars as may be prescribed : xx xxx xx xx xx xx xx xx Explanation 2. In this sub-section, "due date" means, (a) where assessee other than assessee referred to in clause (aa) is GURBAX SINGH (i) company; or 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 6 (ii) person (other than company) whose accounts are required to be audited under this Act or under any other law for time being in force; or (iii) working partner of firm whose accounts are required to be audited under this Act or under any other law for time being in force, 30th day of September of assessment year; (aa) in case of assessee who is required to furnish report referred to in section 92E, 30th day of November of assessment year; (b) in case of person other than company, referred to in first proviso to this sub-section, 31st day of October of assessment year; (c) in case of any other assessee, 31st day of July of assessment year. xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx 139C. Power of Board to dispense with furnishing documents, etc. with return. (1) Board may make rules providing for class or classes of persons who may not be required to furnish documents, statements, receipts, certificates, reports of audit or any other documents, which are otherwise under any other provisions of this Act, except section 139D, required to be furnished, along with return but on demand to be produced before Assessing Officer. (2) Any rule made under proviso to sub-section (9) of section 139 as it stood immediately before its omission by Finance Act, 2007 shall be deemed to have been made under provisions of this section. 139D. Filing of return in electronic form. Board may make rules providing for (a) class or classes of persons who shall be required to furnish return in electronic form; (b) form and manner in which return in electronic GURBAX SINGH form may be furnished; 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 7 (c) documents, statements, receipts, certificates or audited reports which may not be furnished along with return in electronic form but shall be produced before Assessing Officer on demand; (d) computer resource or electronic record to which return in electronic form may be transmitted." 119. (1) Board may, from time to time, issue such orders, instructions and directions to other income-tax authorities as it may deem fit for proper administration of this Act, and such authorities and all other persons employed in execution of this Act shall observe and follow such orders, instructions and directions of Board : Provided that no such orders, instructions or directions shall be issued (a) so as to require any income-tax authority to make particular assessment or to dispose of particular case in particular manner; or (b) so as to interfere with discretion of Commissioner (Appeals) in exercise of his appellate functions. (2) Without prejudice to generality of foregoing power, (a) Board may, if it considers it necessary or expedient so to do, for purpose of proper and efficient management of work of assessment and collection of revenue, issue, from time to time (whether by way of relaxation of any of provisions of sections 115P, 115S, 115WD, 115WE, 115WF, 115WG, 115WH, 115WJ, 115WK, 139, 143, 144, 147, 148, 154, 155, 158BFA, sub-section (1A) of section 201, sections 210, 211, 234A, 234B, 234C, 234E, 271 and 273 or otherwise), general or special orders in respect of any class of incomes or fringe benefits or class of cases, setting forth directions or instructions (not being prejudicial to assessees) as to guidelines, principles or procedures to be followed GURBAX SINGH by other income-tax authorities in work relating to 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 8 assessment or collection of revenue or initiation of proceedings for imposition of penalties and any such order may, if Board is of opinion that it is necessary in public interest so to do, be published and circulated in prescribed manner for general information; (b) Board may, if it considers it desirable or expedient so to do for avoiding genuine hardship in any case or class of cases, by general or special order, authorise any income-tax authority, not being Commissioner (Appeals) to admit application or claim for any exemption, deduction, refund or any other relief under this Act after expiry of period specified by or under this Act for making such application or claim and deal with same on merits in accordance with law; (c) Board may, if it considers it desirable or expedient so to do for avoiding genuine hardship in any case or class of cases, by general or special order for reasons to be specified therein, relax any requirement contained in any of provisions of Chapter IV or Chapter VI-A, where assessee has failed to comply with any requirement specified in such provision for claiming deduction thereunder, subject to following conditions, namely: (i) default in complying with such requirement was due to circumstances beyond control of assessee; and (ii) assessee has complied with such requirement before completion of assessment in relation to previous year in which such deduction is claimed : Provided that Central Government shall cause every order issued under this clause to be laid before each House of Parliament. 12. perusal of above provisions shows that Section 139(1) of Act prescribes procedure for assessment whereunder return of income under Chapter XIV of Act is to be furnished. It states that every GURBAX SINGH 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 9 person being company or being person other than company or firm, if his total income or total income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under this Act during previous year exceeded maximum amount which is not chargeable to income tax shall on or before due date furnish return of his income or income of such other person during previous year in prescribed form and verified in prescribed manner and setting forth such other particulars as may be prescribed. Explanation (2) thereof provides for 'due date' which in case of company, person (other than company) or working partner of firm whose accounts are required to be audited under this Act or under any other law for time being in force, is 30th day of September of assessment year. Section 139C provides for making rules for class or classes of persons who may not be required to furnish documents, statements, receipts, certificates, reports of audit or any other documents which are otherwise under any other provisions of Act except Section 139D, required to be furnished alongwith return and instead they are to be produced before Assessing Officer on demand. Section 139D provides for filing of return in electronic form. Under Section 119 of Act, CBDT is inter alia empowered to issue such orders, instructions and directions as it considers necessary or expedient for purpose of proper and efficient management of work of assessment and collection of revenue. It is also authorized to issue such orders, instructions and directions for proper administration of Act. 13. Having analyzed scope of statutory provisions noticed herein before, we proceed to examine scope of extraordinary writ jurisdiction of High Court under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of GURBAX SINGH 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 10 India. This Court while expounding scope of power of superintendence under Article 227 of Constitution of India in Partap Singh Kairon vs. Gurmej Singh, AIR 1958 P&H 409, observed as under:- 19. Our Constitution has vested High Courts in this country with three independent and distinct grants of power or jurisdiction : (1) Original jurisdiction, (2) appellate jurisdiction, (3) general superintending control over all inferior courts and tribunals. 20. power of superintending control conferred by Article 227 is similar to control exercised by court of King's Bench over inferior courts of England under common law. According to Blackstone Court of King's Bench was entitled to general superintendence over all subordinate courts for purpose of keeping them within bounds of their authority and of preventing usurpation. In order to achieve this object King's Bench was at liberty to remove their proceedings to be determined by it, to prohibit their progress below and to enforce in inferior tribunals due exercise of those judicial or ministerial powers which had been vested in them, by restraining their excesses and quickening their negligence and obviating their denial of justice (2 BI. Com. 111). power which was exercised by court of King's Bench was branch of power of King of England, while power which has been conferred on High Courts in this country by Article 227 is branch of sovereign power of people as vested in them by Constitution of democratic Republic.' xx xx xxx xx xx xxx xxx xxx xxx 23. In Pickus v. Perry, (1931) 59 S. D. 350 (Z8) court said: "The existence of this power partakes of nature of GURBAX SINGH ultimate safeguard to be availed of, not as instrument of 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 11 routine procedure, but in extraordinary and unusual situations where customary remedial procedure is inadequate and resort must be had to some such high power for public good or for prevention of gross injustice and irreparable injury. very nature of power, its scope and lack of limitation, impose upon court to which it is entrusted most serious responsibility to make prudent and sparing use of it, and to employ it in those cases only where exercise of sound judicial discretion clearly indicates necessity for its use". Again court said: 'The exercise of power of superintending control is always matter of discretion, never matter of absolute right, and it is clear weight of authority that power will not ordinarily be exercised as substitute for appellate jurisdiction, or where other remedy exists, excepting only in those cases where other remedy is so slow, difficult, or inadequate that to compel resort thereto amounts to denial of justice". 24. general principles governing exercise of power of superintending control were admirably summarised in Re Pierce-Arrow Motor Car Co., (1910) 143 Wis. 282 (Z9) where court said: "That this jurisdiction is not to be exercised upon light occasion, but only upon some grave exigency; that writs by which it is exercised will not be used to perform ordinary functions of appeal or writ of error; that duty of court below must be plain; its refusal to proceed within line of such duty or, on other hand, its intent to proceed in violation of such duty, must be clear results must be not only prejudicial, but must involve extraordinary hardship; remedy by appeal or writ of error must be utterly inadequate; and application for exercise of GURBAX SINGH power of superintending control must be speedy and 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 12 prompt". This was followed by Single Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court in Sukha vs. Central Administrative Tribunal, 1996(1) SCT 547. 14. While discussing scope of Article 226 of Constitution of India, Apex Court in Sh.Jogendrasinhji Vijaysinghji vs. State of gujarat and others, Civil Appeal No.2374 of 2015 decided on 6.7.2015 observed as under:- 11. In dealing with powers of High Court under Article 226 of Constitution, this Court has expressed itself in almost similar terms, vide Veerappa Pillai v. Raman and Raman Ltd. AIR 1952 SC 192 at pp 195-196(1) and said: Such writs as are referred to in Article 226 are obviously intended to enable High Court to issue them in grave cases where subordinate tribunals or bodies or officers act wholly without jurisdiction, or in excess of it, or in violation of principles of natural justice, or refuse to exercise jurisdiction vested in them, or there is error apparent on face of record, and such act, omission, error or excess has resulted in manifest injustice. However extensive jurisdiction may be, it seems to us that it is not so wide or large as to enable High Court to convert itself into court of appeal and examine for itself correctness of decision impugned and decide what is proper view to be taken or order to be made. These passages indicate with sufficient fullness general principles that govern exercise of jurisdiction in matter of granting writs of certiorari under Article 226 of Constitution. 7. In Hari Vishnu Kamath v. Ahmad Ishaque and Ors. AIR 1955 SC 233, seven- Judge Bench, while dealing with GURBAX SINGH scope of proceeding under Article 226 of Constitution, 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 13 observed that there can be no dispute that orders of Election Tribunals are subject to supervisory jurisdiction of High Courts under Article 226 and writ of certiorari under that Article will be competent against decisions of Election Tribunals also. Court referred to decision in T.C.Basappa (supra) and other authorities and ruled thus:- We are also of opinion that Election Tribunals are subject to superintendence of High Courts under Article 227 of Constitution, and that superintendence is both judicial and administrative. That was held by this Court in Waryam Singh v. Amarnath, AIR 1954 SC 215, where it was observed that in this respect Article 227 went further than Section 224 of Government of India Act, 1935, under which superintendence was purely administrative, and that it restored position under Section 107 of Government of India Act, 1915. It may also be noted that while in certiorari under Article 226 High Court can only annul decision of Tribunal, it can, under Article 227, do that, and also issue further directions in matter. We must accordingly hold that application of appellant for writ of certiorari and for other reliefs was maintainable under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution. 15. In present case, Form Nos. 4, 5 and 6 were prescribed on Ist, 2nd and 7th of August 2015 respectively when audited accounts were required to be appended for e-filing of return under Sections 139C and 139D of Act. Further, it has been admitted by respondent department in office memorandum dated 24.9.2015 that since returns in ITRs 4, 5 and 6 were mandatorily required to be e-filed, no assessees in these categories could have filed their returns of income for assessment year 2015-16 before 1st, 2nd and 7th of August 2015 respectively. Under GURBAX SINGH 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 14 Section 119 of Act, Board has specific powers to pass general or special orders in respect of any class or class of cases by way of relaxation of any of provisions of Act which also includes Section 139 thereof. For avoiding genuine hardship in any case or class of cases, Board if considers desirable and expedient, by general or special order, it can issue such orders, instructions and direction for proper administration of this Act. All such authorities engaged in execution of Act are expected to follow same. Board has not only to see public interest for so doing but also for avoiding genuine hardship in any particular case or class of cases when such powers can be exercised. It was not disputed by learned counsel for revenue that forms were not available on very first day of assessment year as required. Learned counsel for revenue could not furnish any satisfactory explanation or justification for not prescribing Forms 4, 5 and 6 prior to Ist, 2nd and 7th August, 2015 respectively. plea of department that there were only minor changes in forms is not justified. Thus, period required for e-filing of return is held to be not reasonable. 16. In Tax Bar Association, Hisar vs. State of Haryana and others, CWP No.15499 of 2015 decided on 30.7.2015, Division Bench of this Court considering issue relating to extension in time for filing returns under Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 had extended date for e-filing of returns upto 10.8.2015. 17. Single Bench of Delhi High Court in Avinash Gupta vs. Union of India and others, W.P.(C) No.9032 of 2015 decided on 21.9.2015, had occasion to consider issue relating to extension of GURBAX SINGHtime for e-filing of return beyond 30th September 2015. writ petition 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 15 was dismissed but certain observations were recorded therein that prescribed format to be filed alongwith return should be notified by Ist day of assessment year. It was recorded as under:- Notwithstanding having held so, I am of view that there is however some merit, if not legal then otherwise, in grievance of petitioner. counsel for respondents appearing on advance notice is unable to give reasons for forms etc. being not available at beginning of assessment year on 1st April of every year and same thereby causing inconvenience to practitioners of subject. There is sufficient time available to Government, after Finance Act of financial year, to finalize forms and if no change is intended therein, to notify of same immediately. There appears to be no justification for delay beyond assessment year in prescribing said forms. Accordingly, though not granting any relief to petitioner for current assessment year, respondents are directed to, with effect from next assessment year, at least ensure that forms etc. which are to be prescribed for audit report and for filing ITR are available as on 1st April of assessment year unless there is valid reason therefor and which should be recorded in writing by respondents themselves, without waiting for any representations to be made. respondents, while doing so, to also take decision whether owing thereto any extension of due date is required to be prescribed and accordingly notify public. We are in agreement with above observations but express our dissent with regard to rejection of prayer for extension of time in e-filing returns beyond 30th September 2015. 18. Similarly, Gujarat High Court in All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes, Special Civil Application No.12656 of 2014 decided on 22.9.2014 while delving into GURBAX SINGH 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 16 identical issue held that keeping in view facts and circumstances of case, it would be in fitness of things if Board relaxes provisions of Section 139(1) of Act by extending due date for filing return of income till 30th of November 2014 as direct consequence whereof, specified date for obtaining and furnishing report of audit under Section 44AB of Act would get automatically extended. It was observed as under:- 53. CBDT derives its powers under statute which enjoins upon Board to issue from time to time such orders, instructions and directions to other income-tax authorities if found expedient and necessary for proper administration of Act. Without prejudice to generality of powers provided under sub-section (1) of section 119 of Act, CBDT also has specific powers to pass general or special orders in respect of any class or class of cases by way of relaxation of any of provisions of section, which also includes section 139 of Act. If Board is of opinion that it is necessary in public interest to so do it. For avoiding genuine hardship in any case or class of cases, CBDT if considers desirable and expedient, by general or special order, it can issue such orders, instructions and directions for proper administration of this Act. All such authorities engaged in execution of Act are expected to follow same. Any requirement contained in any of provisions of Chapter IV or Chapter VIA also can be relaxed by CBDT for avoiding genuine hardship in any case or class of cases by general or special orders. This provision, therefore, gives very wide powers to CBDT to pass general or special orders whenever it deems it necessary or expedient to so do it in respect of any class of income or class of cases. It has not only to see public interest for so doing, but also for avoiding genuine hardship in any particular case or class of GURBAX SINGH cases, such powers can be exercised. 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 17 Xx xxx xxx xx xx xx xx xx xx 65. In light of above discussion, these petitions succeed and are, accordingly, allowed. respondent Board is directed to modify notification dated 20th August, 2014 issued in exercise of powers under section 119 of Act by extending due date for furnishing return of income to 30th November, 2014. It would, however, be open for Board to qualify such relaxation by extending due date for all purposes, except for purpose of Explanation 1 to section 234A of Act. Rule is made absolute accordingly, to aforesaid extent with no order as to costs. 19. To put record straight, it is noted that arguments in writ petition by both sides were concluded on 28.9.2015 and case was adjourned for today for orders. Learned counsel for revenue has produced copy of order dated 28.9.2015 passed by Rajasthan High Court on Public Interest Litigation in Rajasthan Tax Consultants Association and another vs. Union of India and another, D.B. Civil Writ (PIL) Petition No.11037 of 2015, where Hon'ble Bench has declined to interfere by referring that it is policy decision of Government and had relied upon decision of Delhi High Court in Avinash Gupta's case (supra) dated 21.9.2015 where writ petition was dismissed for extension of time. As noticed above, we have already expressed our dissent with order passed by Delhi High Court qua dismissing writ petition with regard to extension of time for e-filing of income tax returns. Accordingly, we are unable to concur with view expressed by Rajasthan High Court. 20. In view of above, taking totality of facts and circumstances of case, it is considered appropriate to extend due date GURBAX SINGHfor e-filing of returns upto 31st October 2015 for which CBDT shall 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CWP No.19770 of 2015 18 issue appropriate notification/instructions under Section 119 of Act. Direction is also issued to respondents to ensure that forms etc. which are to be prescribed for audit report and for e-filing returns should ordinarily be made available on first day of April of assessment year. writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Kumar Mittal) Judge September 29, 2015 (Ramendra Jain) 'gs' Judge GURBAX SINGH 2015.09.29 11:27 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh Vishal Garg and others v. Union of India and another