2021 (10) TMI 87 - AT - Income Tax

Levy fee u/s 234E - amendment to section 200A of the Act w.e.f 01.06.2015 - whether late filing fee u/s 234E of the Act has rightly been charged in the intimation issued u/s 200A/206CB of the Act while processing the TDS returns/statements as the enabling clause (c) having been inserted in the section w.e.f. 01.06.2015 - HELD THAT - As decided in SUDARSHAN GOYAL VERSUS DCIT- (TDS) , GHAZIABAD. 2018 (5) TMI 1626 - ITAT AGRA substitution made by clause (c) to (f) u/s 200A(1) can be read as having prospective effect and not having retrospective effect - thus the demand u/s 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee u/s 234E could not be made - the levy of the fee is cancelled. Also see SRI. FATHERAJ SINGHVI AND OTHERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 2016 (9) TMI 964 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - Decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Levy of fee u/s 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961

Analysis:
1. The appeals were against the order of the ld. CIT(A) upholding the levy of fee u/s 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The common issue in all appeals was the imposition of late fees u/s 234E by the AO.

2. The AO imposed late fees u/s 234E, and the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed relief to the assessee based on a previous ITAT decision. The ITAT held that the AO acquired jurisdiction to levy fees as of 1.06.2015, and any return filed and processed after that date could be subject to fee under section 234E. The period for which fees could be levied was determined from 1.06.2015 to the date of actual filing of the TDS return.

3. For the financial year (F.Y.) 2012-13, TDS statements filed after 01.06.2015 were subject to the levy of late filing fees u/s 234E. However, for F.Y. 2013-14, statements filed before 01.06.2015 were not liable for late fees under section 234E.

4. The issue of late fee u/s 234E was also addressed by the Co-ordinated bench ITAT Agra in a similar case. The ITAT Agra referred to a previous decision and held that the demand under section 200A for the payment of fee under section 234E could not be made for the period before 1.06.2015. The levy of the fee was canceled based on this interpretation.

5. The ITAT upheld the orders of the CIT(A) based on previous decisions and confirmed the imposition of late fees u/s 234E in the present case. The appeals of the assessee were dismissed, and the levy of the fee was upheld.

This detailed analysis provides a comprehensive understanding of the judgment regarding the levy of fee u/s 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as discussed in the appellate tribunal's decision.