9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1762X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 018 (6) TMI 303 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] As regards the levy of fees u/s 234E for A.Y. 2016-17 is concerned, we find that as the statements of TDS for the first quarter therein involved was to be filed latest by 15.07.2015, i.e. subsequent to the cut off period of 01.06.2015 (the date on which the section enabling levy of fees u/s 234E was made available in Sec.200A), therefore, no infirmity arises from the imposition of the aforesaid fees in the hands of the assessee. As observed A.R had admitted that he is not assailing the levy of fees u/s 234E insofar the delay involved in filing of the statement of TDS for A.Y. 2016-17 is concerned. Thus in terms of our aforesaid observations the fees levied by the ACIT, CPC, Ghaziabad u/s 234E for A. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15.10.2012 25.02.2013 133 26,600 26Q 2012-13 3 15.01.2013 21.03.2013 65 13,000 26Q 2012-13 4 15.05.2013 18.07.2013 64 12,800 26Q 2012-13 4 15.05.2013 08.10.2013 146 29,200 Total 81,600 A.Yr. 2014-15 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2014-15 1 15.07.2014 26.11.2015 499 99,800 26Q 2014-15 2 15.10.2014 30.11.2015 411 82,000 26Q 2014-15 3 15.01.2015 30.11.2015 319 63,000 26Q 2014-15 4 15.05.2015 30.11.2015 199 39,800 24Q 2014-15 1 15.07.2014 02.12.2015 505 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Sec.234E was made available in Sec. 200A with effect from 01.06.2015, therefore, the ACIT, CPC, Ghaziabad had erred in levying fees under the said statutory provision in A.Y. 2013-14 and 2014-15. Insofar the levy of fees under Sec.234E for A.Y. 2016-17 was concerned, it was submitted by the ld. A.R that no infirmity as regards the levy of fees for the said year did emerge from the order of the ACIT, CPC, Ghaziabad. In order to drive home his aforesaid contention that now when Sec.234E enabling the levy of fees in itself was made available in Sec.200A with effect from 01.06.2015, therefore, no fees under the aforesaid statutory provision could have been validly imposed on the assessee in A.Y. 2013-14 to A.Y. 2015-16, support was drawn f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al available on record, as well as the judicial pronouncements relied upon by them. Admittedly, it is a matter of fact borne from the records, that the assessee had delayed the filing of the statements of tax deduction at source in Forms 26Q/24Q for the aforementioned quarters pertaining to the captioned years under consideration i.e A.Y. 2013-14, 2014-15, A.Y. 2015-16 and A.Y 2016-17. We find that the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Fatehraj Singhvi Vs. Union of India (2016) 289 CTR 602 (Kar), had concluded, that the notice under Sec.200A of the Act computing fee under Sec.234E, to the extent the same related to the period of the tax deduction prior to 01.06.2015 was liable to be set aside‟. The aforesaid judgment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o 01.06.2015. 7. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the issue before us and finding ourselves as being in agreement with the view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Tata Rice Mills (supra), hence are of the considered view that the ACIT-TDS, CPC Ghaziabad in the case before us had erred in levying fees under Sec.234E in respect of tax deducted at source for the four quarters prior to 01.06.2015 in respect of the captioned years viz. A.Y. 2013-14, 2014-15 and A.Y.2015-16. We thus not being persuaded to subscribe to the view taken by the CIT(A) who had upheld the levy of fees by the A.O, thus set aside his order and vacate the demand raised by the A.O under Sec.234E in the hands of the assessee for all the four quarters for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
