9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1563X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enabling provisions for levy of late fee prior to 1st June 2015? - HELD THAT:- Considering the facts of the instant case are identical to the facts of the orders passed by Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi Ors.[ 2016 (9) TMI 964 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] and M/s. M.G.N. Khalsa High School, Jalandhar [ 2019 (8) TMI 99 - ITAT AMRITSAR] and in the case of SIBIA HEALTHCARE (P) Ltd.[ 2015 (6) TMI 437 - ITAT AMRITSAR] we are of the considered opinion that late fee for the delay in filing the TDS statements, cannot be levied for the period prior to 1st June, 2015, hence we are inclined to delete the late fee imposed by the AO and affirmed by the ld. CIT(A). Consequently the appeal is liable to be allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l the Assessee thought deducted the TDS on salary payments and deposited well in time, however filed its TDS Quarterly statement in Form no. 24Q for Quarter 2 of F.Y. 2012-13 on 09.11.2013 which was due to be filed on or before 15.10.2012. Consequently the delay of 390 days in filing of TDS statements has been occurred. Therefore the Assessing Officer (TDS-CPC) had imposed a late fee U/s 234E for 390 days of ₹ 15,000/- for delay in filing of Quarterly TDS statement. 4. Aggrieved by the intimation u/s 200A wherein fee u/s 234E has been levied, the assessee filed first appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who vide impugned order dated 21.08.2019 dismissed the appeal of the assessee, while relying upon the judgment passed by the Gujrat High Court i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... J 145 (Asr) clearly held that intimation issued u/s 200A of the Act for demand of fees u/s 234E was not valid in law, as the same pertains to the period prior to 1st June, 2015. 9. No doubt there are judgments specifically as refereed above to the issue under consideration, on both sides as relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) while passing the impugned order and by the Asseeee before us. However, as per decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vegetable Products 88 ITR 192, wherein the Hon'ble Court laid down the proposition to the effects "whenever there are two reasonable constructions of a taxing provision are possible that construction which favours the assessee must be adopted" meaning thereby when two differe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
