9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upto the extent of amendment in Section 234E of the Act w.e.f.01.06.2015. We direct the AO to delete the fee levied u/s. 234E for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd 4th quarters for the Financial Year 2013-2014 relevant to assessment year 2014-2015 and for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd 4th quarters for the Financial Year 2014-2015 relevant to assessment year 2015-2016 on account of late filing of TDS return - Allow the appeals of the assessee - ITA Nos.440 to 449/CTK/2019 - - - Dated:- 25-2-2020 - Shri C.M. Garg, JM And Shri L.P. Sahu, AM For the Assessee : Shri A.K.Padhy, FCA For the Revenue : Shri J.K.Lenka, DR ORDER PER BENCH : These are the ten appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar all dated 25.09.2019 for the 1st to 4th quarters for the Financial Year 2013-2014 relevant to assessment year 2014-2015, for the 1st to 4th quarters for the Financial Year 2014-2015 relevant to assessment year 2015-2016 and for the 3rd 4th Quarters for the Financial Year 2015-2016 relevant to assessment year 2016-2017, respectively 2. The sole issue involved in all these appeals relating to levy of late filing fees u/s.274E of the Act. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... At the outset, ld. AR relied on the order of coordinate bench of the Tribunal and submitted that the issue involved in these ten appeals is covered by the decision of this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Glee Pharma Pvt. Ltd., ITA Nos.161-163/CTK/2016, order dated 28.08.2017, wherein the Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. 7. Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of authorities below. 8. After hearing the submissions of both the sides and perusing the entire material available on record, we find that the assessee has deducted TDS, which has been deposited within the time and on perusal of the demand notice raised by the CPC(TDS), it is noticed that there is no any short payment, short deduction/collection, interest on payment default u/s.201(1A)/206C(7) of the Act, interest on short payment, interest on deduction/collection default u/s.201(1A)/206C(7) of the Act, interest on short deduction/collection, interest on late deduction/collection, which shows that there was no delay for deduction and deposit. Only the assessee did not comply the provisions of Section 234E of the Act, therefore, the CPC(TDS) has raised the demand against the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vegetable Products Ltd. 88 ITR 192 (SC)). In such a scenario, we are inclined to follow the order of the Karnataka High Court which has been brought to our knowledge by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. 7. The facts in Fatehraj Singh vs..Union of India (supra), which was decided by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court was that for financial year 2012-13 and 2013-14, TDS was deducted by the respective assessees and deposited in the Government account. However, as per the Department, there was delay in filing the return/statement with the details of the persons from whom the TDS was deducted including the details and the persons concerned and the transactions etc. The Department issued intimation u/s 200A of the Act, calling upon the respective assessees to pay late filing fee u/s 234E of the Act in purported exercise of the power u/s 200A of the Act. The assessee challenged the levy of the fee and also the vires of the statute (Section 234E). The Hon'ble High Court did not make any finding in respect of the vires of the statute and the said issue was left open. However, the Hon'ble High Court held that prior to 01.06.2015, the AO while issuing intimation u/s 200A does n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctive assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. Hence, the demand notices under Section 200A by the respondent-authority for intimation for payment of fee under Section 234E can be said as without any authority of law and the same are quashed and set aside to that extent. 8. We take note that the facts of the aforesaid case and the facts before us are similar. Only after 01.06.2015, the AO can levy fee under section 234E of the Act while processing the statement under section 200A of the Act and not before. Therefore, respectfully relying the order of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court, the impugned intimation of the lower authorities levying fee under section 234E of the Act cannot be sustained in law. Accordingly the intimation under section 200A as confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) in so far as levy of fee under section 234E is set aside and fee levied u/s 243E in all the appeals are ordered to be deleted. However, the other adjustments made by the AO in the impugned intimation shall stand as such. 6. In the appeals before us, the financial year involved is 2013-14. Therefore, respectfully following the precedent, we set aside the orders of lower authorities and delete the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and in the Memorandom explaining the introduction of Finance Bill, 2015 clearly took note of the provisions of Chapter XVIIB under which the persons deducting tax i.e. deductor was required to file quarterly tax deduction at source, statements containing the details of deduction of tax made during quarterly by the prescribed due dates. (Similar responsibility is on the persons required to collect tax of certain specified receipt u/s. 206C of the Act). In order to provide effective deterrence against the delay in furnishing TDS/TCS statements, the Finance Act, 2012 inserted sec. 234E of the Act to provide for levy of fees on late furnishing of TDS statements. The Memorandum of Finance Bill, 2015, further took note of the fact that the Finance (No. 2) Act 2009, inserted sec. 200A in the Act, which prescribed for furnishing of TDS statements for determining the amount payable or refundable to the deductor. It further took note that however, as sec. 234E of the Act was inserted after the insertion of sec. 200A in the Act, the existing provisions of sec. 200A of the Act do not provide for determination of late fees payable u/s. 234E of the Act at the time of processing of TDS statement. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he TDS return and the balance fees levied earlier to 01.06.2015 is directed to be deleted. Respectfully following the above observations of the Tribunal in the aforesaid case and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the impugned order passed by the CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the fee levied u/s.234E of the Act at ₹ 74,400/- on account of late fling of TDS return for Quarter-IV. Accordingly, we allow the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. 10. We have gone through the above observations of the Tribunal and respectfully following the same, we direct the AO to delete the fee levied u/s.234E of the Act for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd 4th quarters for the Financial Year 2013-2014 relevant to assessment year 2014-2015 and for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd 4th quarters for the Financial Year 2014-2015 relevant to assessment year 2015-2016 on account of late filing of TDS return. However, we reject the plea of the assessee taken in appeal for A.Y.2016-2017 for 3rd 4th Quarters, as only after 01.06.2015, the AO can levy fee u/s.234E of the Act, while processing the statement u/s.200A of the Act and not before and in this regard both the authorities b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
