9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 303X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raj Singhvi (2016 (9) TMI 964 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT), we hold that the fees levied in all the present cases u/s 234E prior to 01.06.2015 in the intimations made u/s 200A was without authority of law and the same is, therefore, directed to be deleted. All the appeals of the assessee stand allowed. - ITA No. 1158/CHD/2017, ITA No. 963/CHD/2017 - - - Dated:- 1-5-2018 - SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal Respondent by : Shri Manjit Singh, Sr.DR ORDER PER BENCH These appeals by the assessee s are directed against the orders of the CIT(A)-1 Chandigarh dated 31/03/2017 pertaining to 2013-14, assessment year. 2. It was common ground b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 268 and the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Dundlod Shikshan Sansthan v. Union of India [2015] 63 taxmann.com 243 in this regard. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee has come up in appeal before us raising the following common grounds in both the appeals: 1. That on the facts, circumstances of the case and in law, the Worthy CIT(A) through his order dated 31.03.2017 has erred in passing that order in contravention of the provisions of S. 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That on the facts, circumstances of the case and in law, the Worthy CIT(A) has grossly erred in holding that appeal against order passed u/s 200A, wherein fee u/s 234E has been charged, is not maintainable before him u/s 246A. 3. That on the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s 200A of the Act, prior to 01.06.2015, and that as per the provisions of Section 200A of the Act, which existed on the date when the above returns were processed, no adjustment on account of fees u/s 234E could be made while processing the said returns u/s 200A of the Act. The ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that the mandate to make such adjustment was provided by the Statute only w.e.f. 01.06.2015 by way of an amendment made to Section 200A by the Finance Act, 2015. The ld. counsel for the assessee, therefore, stated that the adjustment made in the present case of levying fees u/s 234E while processing the TDS return u/s 200A of the Act was bad in law. The ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that the ITAT in a number of c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... possible on an issue, the view favourable to the assessee was to be taken. In this regard, ld. counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs Poddar Cement Pvt. Ltd. (1997) 226 ITR 625 and CIT Vs Vegetable Products Ltd. 88 ITR 192 (1973). The ld. counsel for the assessee further stated that the CIT(A) had erred in dismissing the appeal stating that it is non-maintainable. Ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that intimation made u/s 200A are appealable to the CIT(A) as per provisions of Section 246A of the Act, which outlines the appealable orders before the Commissioner (Appeals) and it is against this intimation that the assessee had filed appeal to the CIT(A). 8. We have heard the rival ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt and the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court that no appeal lies against levy of fees u/s 234E. We are not in agreement with the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. As pointed out above, the fees u/s 234E in the present case was levied in the intimations made u/s 200A of the Act. Such intimations are appealable before the CIT(A) as per the provisions of Section 246A of the Act and in the present case, the assessee had filed appeals against these intimations made u/s 200A. Therefore, all the appeals were maintainable and the ld. CIT(A) had wrongly dismissed the assessees appeals holding them to be nonmaintainable. As for the reliance placed by the CIT(A) on the orders passed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of adjustment made on account of levy of fees u/s 234E in the intimations passed u/s 200A which, otherwise, are appealable before the CIT(A). In view of the above, the order passed by the ld. CIT(A), we hold, is not as per law. 10. Now coming to the merits of the case, we find force in the argument of the ld. counsel for the assessee that prior to 01.06.2015, there was no mandate, as per the Statute, to make any adjustment on account of levy of fees u/s 234E while processing TDS returns u/s 200A. We have taken note of the order of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court holding the amendment made to Section 200A w.e.f. 01.06.2015, giving power to make adjustment on account of fees u/s 234E while processing returns u/s 200A, to be retrospect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
