9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee, in respect of TDS statement filed for a period up to 31.03.2015, no late fee could be levied in the intimation issued u/s. 200A of the Act. On similar facts, the same issue has been adjudicated in the case of Sudershan Goyal [ 2018 (5) TMI 1626 - ITAT AGRA] respectfully following Shri Fatehraj Singhvi and Ors [ 2016 (9) TMI 964 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] accept the grievance of the assessees as genuine. Accordingly, the orders of the CIT(A) are reversed and the fee so levied under section 234E of the Act is cancelled. Appeal of assessee allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the hearing by both parties. There was a delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) and the delay in filing the appeal was stated to be medical issues of the Learned Counsel. Learned CIT(A) did not condone the delay in filing the appeal and thereby dismissed the appeal of the assessee without considering the merits of the case. 5. We find that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 70 SCC 123 has held that as long as the conduct of the applicant does not, on the whole, warrant to castigate him as an irresponsible litigant, generally, the delay be condoned. It has further held that rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the right of parties but they are meant to see that parties do not res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeals, hence they are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity, after condoning the delay. We have heard the Ld. Counsel of both side i.e. Assessee and Revenue for all the cases. 7. The common issue involved in these appeals is that the AO imposed late fees u/s. 234E of the Act., where the enabling clause (c) was inserted in the section 200A w.e.f. 01.06.2015. Which has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of 'Rajesh Kaurani vs. Union of India', 83 Taxmann.com 137 (Guj). 8. Having heard both the parties and considering the facts of all these appeals as to whether late filing fee u/s. 234E of the Act has rightly been charged in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ld. CIT(A) himself, decides the issue in favour of the assessee. The only objection of the ld. CIT(A) is that this decision and others to the same effect have been taken into consideration by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court while passing 'Rajesh Kaurani' (supra). However, while observing so, the ld. CIT(A) has failed to take into consideration the settled law that where there is a cleavage of opinion between different High Courts on an issue, the one in favour of the assessee needs to be followed. It has so been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'CIT vs. Vegetable Products Ltd.', 88 ITR 192 (SC). It is also not a case where the decision against the assessee has been rendered by the Jurisdictional High Court qua t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
