Case Law
2025-11-29
Subject: Taxation Law - Direct Taxation
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to extend the due date for filing Income Tax Returns (ITRs) to November 30, 2025, for assessees who are required to furnish a tax audit report. The decision, delivered by a bench of Justice Lisa Gill and Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta, reinforces the statutory one-month gap between the deadline for filing the audit report and the ITR.
The Court expressed its disapproval of the CBDT's tendency to delay such decisions until the last moment, echoing a recent, similar ruling by the Gujarat High Court.
A batch of four writ petitions, led by Ashwini Kumar vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes , was filed seeking an extension of the deadline for filing tax audit reports and, consequently, the ITRs for the Assessment Year 2025-26. The petitioners argued that the e-filing utilities for the audit reports and returns were made available by the Income Tax Department only in August 2025, significantly reducing the time available for compliance and causing "genuine hardship" to taxpayers and professionals.
The original deadline for filing the tax audit report under Section 44AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 , was September 30, 2025.
The petitioners contended that the delay in releasing the necessary forms warranted a reasonable extension. They highlighted that the law itself, under Explanation (ii) to Section 44AB , defines the "specified date" for filing the audit report as one month prior to the "due date" for filing the ITR under Section 139(1).
During the proceedings, the CBDT did extend the deadline for filing the tax audit report from September 30 to October 31, 2025. However, it remained non-committal on the corresponding extension for filing the ITR, repeatedly informing the court that the proposal was "under consideration."
The High Court took significant note of a decision by the Gujarat High Court dated October 13, 2025, in a similar matter ( Income Tax Bar Association vs. Union of India ). In that case, the Gujarat High Court had already directed the CBDT to extend the ITR due date to November 30, 2025.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court quoted the Gujarat High Court's sharp criticism of the CBDT's practice of waiting until the deadline is imminent:
> “...respondent no. 2 -CBDT therefore would not be justified to wait till end of OCTOBER,2025 for issuing circular to extend the “due date”.”
The bench observed that the CBDT had not challenged the Gujarat High Court's order, yet had failed to issue the necessary circular, creating uncertainty for taxpayers nationwide.
Finding no justification for further adjournments, the Court concluded that the CBDT's inaction was untenable. The bench held that if the "specified date" for the audit report is extended to October 31, then the "due date" for the ITR must consequentially be extended to maintain the statutory one-month period.
Disposing of all four petitions, the Court issued a clear directive:
> "...directing respondent – CBDT to issue necessary circular in exercise of power under Section 119 of the Act to extend the due date for filing of returns by assessees required to file audit report... for Financial Year 2024-2025 (Assessment Year 2025-26) to 30.11.2025."
This ruling provides much-needed clarity and relief to companies, firms, and other assessees subject to tax audits, ensuring they have adequate time for compliance as envisioned by the statute.
#TaxLaw #DueDateExtension #CBDT
Family Judge Exposes Weaponized Litigation in Custody Dispute
14 Feb 2026
Centre Notifies Two High Court Chief Justice Appointments
16 Feb 2026
Deep Chandra Joshi Appointed Acting NCLT President
16 Feb 2026
Debunking the Myth That Indians Lack Privacy Concepts
16 Feb 2026
Whose View Is It Anyway? Juniors Uncredited
16 Feb 2026
Private Property Disputes Not Human Rights Violations; HRC Lacks Jurisdiction Under PHRA: Gujarat HC
16 Feb 2026
Supreme Court Rejects Stay on RTI Data Amendments
16 Feb 2026
DIFC Court: Strong Reasons Required to Block Arbitration
17 Feb 2026
Bar Leaders Oppose High Courts Saturday Sittings
17 Feb 2026
The classification of land as 'Rasta' falls under the definition of 'public premises' in the eviction statute, thus the eviction proceedings initiated against unauthorized occupants are legally valid....
Cancellation of bail requires cogent circumstances; mere allegations of misconduct are insufficient without evidence of misuse or supervening circumstances.
Financial companies must seek relief through legal channels when police seize pledged items under allegations of theft, ensuring adherence to established guidelines and protocols.
Right to exemption from personal appearance in trials for handicapped individuals was upheld by the court.
The disposal of seized property without notice and due process violates constitutional rights, rendering such actions illegal and unconstitutional.
A petitioner challenging eviction from government land must substantiate claims against authority actions and show violations of due process to avoid eviction.
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.