9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (2) TMI 86 - AT - Income TaxLevy of fee u/s 234E in the order u/s 200A - Held that - The adjustment in respect of levy of fees under section 234E was indeed beyond the scope of permissible adjustments contemplated under section 200A. In view of these discussions, as also bearing in mind entirety of the case, the impugned levy of fees under section 234 E is unsustainable in law. We, therefore, uphold the grievance of the assessee and delete the impugned levy of fee under section 234E of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee
Issues:
1. Levy of late filing penalty under section 234E of the Act for the 4th Quarter of 2012-13. 2. Interpretation of provisions of section 234E and section 200A. 3. Validity of late fee charged under section 234E in the intimation under section 200A. 4. Applicability of the decision of ITAT, Amritsar Bench to the present case. Issue 1: Levy of late filing penalty under section 234E of the Act for the 4th Quarter of 2012-13: The appeal was filed against the order confirming the late filing penalty of Rs. 12,000 levied under section 234E for the 4th Quarter of 2012-13. The Tribunal referred to a similar case decided by ITAT, Amritsar Bench, where the late fee under section 234E was deleted. The Tribunal emphasized that the fee under section 234E should not exceed the tax deductible or collectible. It was noted that the late fee was imposed post the filing of the TDS statement, which was beyond the permissible adjustments under section 200A. The Tribunal concluded that the levy of fees under section 234E in the intimation under section 200A was unsustainable in law, and the late fee was deleted. Issue 2: Interpretation of provisions of section 234E and section 200A: Section 234E of the Act imposes a fee for defaults in furnishing statements, while section 200A deals with the processing of TDS statements. The Tribunal highlighted the limitations of adjustments permissible under section 200A, which did not include the levy of fees under section 234E. The Tribunal emphasized that the adjustment in respect of the late fee was beyond the scope of permissible adjustments under section 200A. The Tribunal also noted the amendment in section 200A post June 2015, allowing for the computation of fees in accordance with section 234E during the processing of TDS statements. Issue 3: Validity of late fee charged under section 234E in the intimation under section 200A: The Tribunal analyzed the legality of the late fee charged under section 234E in the intimation under section 200A. It was observed that the intimation under section 200A, as per the law at that time, did not enable the raising of a demand for the late fee under section 234E. The Tribunal held that the levy of fees under section 234E in the intimation under section 200A was not permissible, and the late fee was deleted based on this analysis. Issue 4: Applicability of the decision of ITAT, Amritsar Bench to the present case: The Tribunal relied on the decision of ITAT, Amritsar Bench, which had deleted the late fee under section 234E in a similar case. The Tribunal found no disparity in facts and decided to follow the reasoning of the ITAT, Amritsar Bench. The Tribunal allowed the appeal and deleted the late fee charged under section 234E, in line with the decision of the Coordinate Bench in a related case. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, deleting the late fee charged under section 234E of the Act, based on the interpretation of relevant provisions and the decision of ITAT, Amritsar Bench.
|
