9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 328X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s 200A(c ) of the Act w.e.f. 1.6.2015 is prospective in nature, therefore revenue authorities are not empowered to levy the fees u/s 234E in the processing completed before 1.6.2015. In the instant case both the date of filing the quarterly return as well as the date of processing by CPC is after 1.6.2015, so in these given facts whether the revenue authorities were justified in levying fee u/s 234E of the Act. Assessee is eligible for partial relief to the extent of deletion of fee levied u/s 234E of the Act for the delay up to 1.6.2015 and the remaining amount i.e. the fees levied for default committed after 1.6.2015 needs to be confirmed. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - ITA No.904 And 905/Ind/2019 - - - Dated:- 7-9-20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee had a reasonable cause for this delay of 49 days. We therefore in the interest of justice and the reasonable cause mentioned before us, condone the delay of 49 days in filing the appeals before the Tribunal and admit it for adjudication. 4. From perusal of the grounds filed in the appeals which have been argued by the counsel, only one issue needs to be adjudicated as to whether the Revenue authorities were justified in levying the late fees u/s 234E of the Act in the statement processed u/s 200A of the Act. 5. Brief facts common to both the appeals are that TDS return for Quarter-2 and Quarter-4 for Financial Year 2014-15 were filed on 29.10.15 and 10.11.2015 were processed by Central Processing Cell (In short CPC) after lev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... computation of fees under section 234E of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 could have been made in respect of TDS deducted for the period respective assessment year prior to 1st June, 2015. 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee has also relied on the following decisions:- l. Fatheraj Singhvi v . Union of India - 12016J 289 CTR 602 (Karnataka) 2. Medical superintendent Rural Hospital, DOBI BK v. DCIT, CPC (TDS), Ghaziabad - (20181 173 ITD 575 (Pune - Trib.) 3. M/s GNA Udyog Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CPC (TDS), Ghaziabad - ITA Nos. 126 to 133/ Asr./2017 4. M/s Vishwas power Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad - ITA No. 276 to 298/NAG/2019 5. Tata Rice Mills Vs. ACIT, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad - LT.A. No. 395/Asr/2016 6. Shri Yes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rds the fate of fees levied u/s 234E of the Act for the returns filed and processed before 1.6.15 we after considering the judicial pronouncements have taken a consistent view that the amendment brought in Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 1.6.2015 under Section 200A (clause (c )] of the Act is prospective in nature thereby empowering the revenue authorities to charge fee u/s 234E of the Act only after 1.6.2015. Various judgments referred and relied by Ld. Counsel for the assessee also lays down common ratio that since the amendment brought in by Finance Act 2015 u/s 200A(c ) of the Act w.e.f. 1.6.2015 is prospective in nature, therefore revenue authorities are not empowered to levy the fees u/s 234E in the processing completed before 1.6.2015. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e date of assumption of jurisdiction by the AO u/s 200A(1)(C) to levy fees under section 234E of the Act. Even though the quarterly return pertains to quarter ended 31.3.2015, the fact remains that there is a continuing default even after 1.6.2015 and the return was actually filed on 22.07.2015. The said provisions cannot be read to say that where an assessee file his return of income for the period falling after 1.6.2015 and there is a delay on his part to file the return in time, he will suffer the levy of fees, however, an assessee who has delayed the filing of the return of income even pertaining to the period prior to 1.06.2015, he can be absolved from such levy even though there is a continuous default ITA No. 764/JP/2017 Shri Ut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ingly hold that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the levy of fee u/s 234E of the Act by the CPC, however we direct the revenue authorities to make necessary verification in each of the case so as to look into the fact that in case if any fee u/s 234E is levied for the delay in filing return for the period before 01.06.2015, the same is directed to be deleted and the remaining fee levied for the default committed from 01.06.2015 onwards needs to be confirmed. 12. In light of the above decision which squarely applies on the instant appeals since the issue and facts remain the same. We are thus of the considered view that the assessee is eligible for partial relief to the extent of deletion of fee levied u/s 234E of the Act for the del ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
