9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 1291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntention was impressive on first blush, it can be seen that the nature of challenge raised by the petitioner is based upon the lack of jurisdiction of the respondents to impose late fee. Since in matters where total lack of jurisdiction is alleged, delay cannot be relied upon as a ground to deny the relief, this Court is of the view that the objections of the respondents are without any basis. The decisions cited are distinguishable on the facts of those cases itself. In the decision in Digambar's case [ 1995 (5) TMI 262 - SUPREME COURT] the delay of 20 years in approaching the High Court for grant of compensation for alleged utilization of the land was held as a decisive factor to disentitle the petitioner therein. Similarly in G.C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in furnishing statements:- (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of the Act, where a person fails to deliver or cause to be delivered a statement within the time prescribed in sub-section (3) of Section 200 or the proviso to sub- section (3) of section 206C, he shall be liable to pay, by way of fee, a sum of two hundred rupees for every day during which the failure continues. 3. According to the petitioner, though section 234E of the Act was introduced by the Finance Act, 2012 with effect from 1 st July, 2012, since petitioner is being demanded to pay, by Ext.P1 to Ext.P9, late fee for not filing the statement of tax deduction at source, it is necessary to refer to section 200A of the Act. It was further submitted that Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for the fourth respondent. 6. I have considered the rival contentions. 7. In the decision in M/s.Sarala Memorial Hospital v. Union of India and Another (W.P.(C) No.37775 of 2018) an identical question arose for consideration. After considering the statutory provisions of section 234E and section 200A of the Act and the implications of the amendment brought in to the Act, it was held that the amendment would take effect only from 1 st June, 2015 and is thus prospective in nature. The aforesaid judgment has become final and is binding upon the authorities. Thus the jurisdiction to levy late fee under section 234E arises only from 01-06.2015 and not earlier. 8. As regards the contention on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
