9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (12) TMI 1323 - AT - Income TaxLevying the late fees u/s 234E while processing the statement of tax deducted at source u/s 200A - Held that - In the given facts and circumstances of the case as well as following the decision given by us in the case of State Bank of India, Genda Chowk and others (2018 (12) TMI 1229 - ITAT INDORE) are of the opinion that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of late fees u/s 234E of the Act by the assessing officer. As decided above in the intimation prepared u/s 200A of the Act up to 31st May 2015, the late filing fee u/s 234E of Act cannot be charged while processing the TDS return/statement because enabling clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 200A have been inserted w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and before this amendment w.e.f 01.06.2015 there was no enabling provision in the Act u/s 200A of the Act for raising demand in respect of levy of fees u/s 234E of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee
Issues Involved:
- Whether the Revenue authorities were justified in levying the late fees under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act while processing the statement of tax deducted at source under Section 200A of the Act before the amendment effective from 01.06.2015. Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Background and Common Issue: The appeals are directed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], Indore. The common issue across all 135 appeals is whether the Revenue authorities were justified in levying late fees under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act while processing the statement of tax deducted at source (TDS) under Section 200A before the amendment effective from 01.06.2015. 2. Brief Facts: The appellants failed to file the statement of TDS within the prescribed due date. Under Section 234E, a fee is leviable for defaults in furnishing the statement of TDS within the prescribed time. The Revenue authorities levied late fees during the processing of the TDS statements under Section 200A. The appellants contended that before the amendment effective from 01.06.2015, the Revenue authorities did not have the power to levy late fees under Section 234E in the statements processed under Section 200A. 3. Appellant's Argument: The appellants, represented by their authorized representatives, argued that the issue is covered in their favor by several decisions of the Coordinate Bench. They cited cases such as Mentor India Limited vs. DCIT, Sudershan Goyal vs. DCIT (TDS), and State Bank of India, Gwalior vs. CIT(A). They argued that the amendment brought by the Finance Act, 2015, effective from 01.06.2015, is prospective in nature. Therefore, no fee under Section 234E could be levied for TDS statements processed under Section 200A before this date. 4. Revenue's Argument: The Departmental Representative failed to counter the arguments made by the appellants' counsel. 5. Tribunal's Analysis: The Tribunal examined the issue and referred to various judicial pronouncements. It noted that the amendment to Section 200A effective from 01.06.2015 is prospective. Hence, the late fees under Section 234E cannot be levied for TDS statements processed under Section 200A before this date. 6. Judicial Precedents: The Tribunal referred to several decisions, including: - Sudarshan Goyal vs. DCIT (TDS): It was held that before 01.06.2015, there was no enabling provision under Section 200A for raising demand for late fees under Section 234E. - Mentor India Limited vs. DCIT: The Tribunal followed the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Fatehraj Singhvi vs. UOI, which held that the amendment is prospective. - State Bank of India, Gwalior vs. CIT(A): The Tribunal reiterated that the amendment is prospective, and late fees under Section 234E cannot be levied for statements processed under Section 200A before 01.06.2015. 7. Conclusion: The Tribunal concluded that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of late fees under Section 234E by the assessing officer. The Tribunal set aside the findings of the CIT(A) and directed the Revenue to delete the levy of fees under Section 234E in all the 135 cases. The common issue raised in these appeals was decided in favor of the assessees. 8. Result: All 135 appeals at the instance of the assessees were allowed, and the order was pronounced in the open court on 20.12.2018.
|
