9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (7) TMI 541 - AT - Income TaxLevying Late fees u/s 234E - belated filing of TDS returns - scope of amendment - demand for the period before 01.06.2015 - HELD THAT - The assessee has filed TDS statements for second and fourth quarters of AY 2013-14 and for the first quarter of AY 2014-15 belatedly. AO cannot make any adjustment other than one prescribed in section 200A. Prior to 01.06.2015, there was no enabling provision in section 200A of the Act for making adjustment in respect of statement filed by the assessee with regard to tax deducted at source by levying fees u/s 234E of the Act. The Parliament for the first time enabled the Assessing Officer to make adjustment by levying fees u/s 234E of the Act with effect from 01.06.2015. In the case of Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. 2022 (2) TMI 1061 - KERALAHIGH COURT has held that since provision of section 200A of the Act was amended to enable computation of fee payable u/s 234E of the Act at the time of processing of return and said amendment came into effect from 01.06.2015 (in view of CBDT Circular No.19 of 2015 dated 17.11.2015) intimations issued u/s 200A of the Act dealing with fee for belated filing of TDS returns for the period prior to 01.06.2015 were invalid and were to be set aside. Therefore, the levy of late fee for financial years 2012-13 and 2013-2014 cannot be sustained in order passed u/s 200A of the Act, prior to 01.06.2015. Assessee appeal allowed.
Issues involved:
1. Appeal against order of National Faceless Appeal Center regarding late fee for belated filing of TDS returns. 2. Consideration of jurisdictional Kerala High Court decision on charging section 234E. 3. Validity of late fee imposed by Assessing Officer for TDS statements filed belatedly. Analysis: Issue 1: Appeal against order of National Faceless Appeal Center The appeals were filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC) regarding late fee imposed for belated filing of TDS returns. The grounds of appeal included contentions that the order was unsustainable in law and facts, and that the assessee's reply was not considered. The appellant argued that the notices were issued by a different address, and the decentralization of TDS matters by the Public Sector Bank was not considered for condonation of delay. The appellant also raised concerns about the notice not being properly served, and the NFAC not considering the jurisdictional Kerala High Court decision on the charging section 234E. The NFAC's order was challenged on various legal grounds, including the contention that it went against the verdict of the High Court, which could be considered as contempt of court. Issue 2: Consideration of jurisdictional Kerala High Court decision The brief facts of the case involved the assessee, a branch of a Nationalised Bank, filing TDS statements belatedly for certain quarters. The Assessing Officer levied late fees for the delay, which were challenged by the assessee before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) upheld the AO's order based on a decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. The NFAC did not consider the jurisdictional High Court decision on the charging section 234E, leading to a legal challenge by the assessee. The Tribunal analyzed the legal position and held that the levy of late fees for certain financial years could not be sustained based on the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court. Issue 3: Validity of late fee imposed by Assessing Officer In an ex-parte hearing due to the absence of the assessee, the Tribunal considered the arguments presented by the Departmental Representative (D.R.). The Tribunal reviewed the material on record and highlighted that prior to 01.06.2015, there was no provision in section 200A of the Income Tax Act for making adjustments related to late fees for TDS returns. The Tribunal referred to a judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, which held that the amendment enabling the computation of late fees came into effect from 01.06.2015. Relying on the legal position established by the High Court judgments, the Tribunal allowed the claim of the assessee and held that the late fee imposed by the Assessing Officer could not be sustained. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the assessee, setting aside the orders of the lower authorities and emphasizing the legal position established by the judgments of the jurisdictional High Court.
|
