9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 656X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nature and the mechanism for computing the late fee was provided by the Parliament only w.e.f. 01.06.2015. Therefore, late fees u/s 234E of the Act can be levied only prospectively w.e.f. 01.06.2015. Thus, notices u/s 200A of the Act for computation and intimation for payment of fee u/s 234E as they relate to for the period of the tax deducted prior to 1.6.2015 are set aside. Decided in favour of assessee. - Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member And Shri Vinay Bhamore, Judicial Member For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde ORDER PER BENCH : These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the Addl/JCIT(A)-4, Bengaluru, dated 08.01.2024 for the assessment year 2014-15 respectively. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l before us. 7. When the matter was called on, there was none to represent the case of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. We, therefore, proceed to dispose of the appeals ex parte qua the assessee after hearing the ld. Departmental Representative. 8. We heard the ld. DR and perused the material on record. The only issue in the present appeal relates to the levy of late fees u/s. 234E of the Act. The ACIT, CPC- TDS, Ghaziabad had levied penalty u/s. 234E of the Act for belated submission of tax deducted at source statement during the financial year 2013-14. It is only w.e.f. 01.06.2015 an amendment was made u/s 200A of the Act providing that fee u/s 234E could be computed at the time of processing of the return of income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d hence, when a privilege is given for a particular purpose which in the present case is to come out from rigors of penal provision of Section 271H(1)(a), it cannot be said that the provisions of fee since creates a counter benefit or reciprocal benefit in favour of the defaulter in the rigors of the penal provision, the provisions of Section 234E would meet with the test of quid pro quo. 21. However, if Section 234E providing for fee was brought on the state book, keeping in view the aforesaid purpose and the intention then, the other mechanism provided for computation of fee and failure for payment of fee under Section 200A which has been brought about with effect from 1.6.2015 cannot be said as only by way of a regulatory mode or a regul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel for respondent-Revenue that insertion of clause (c) to (f) under Section 200A(1) should be treated as retroactive in character and not prospective. 22. It is hardly required to be stated that, as per the well established principles of interpretation of statute, unless it is expressly provided or impliedly demonstrated, any provision of statute is to be read as having prospective effect and not retrospective effect. Under the circumstances, we find that substitution made by clause (c) to (f) of sub-section (1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g prospective effect, no computation of fee for the demand or the intimation for the fee under Section 234E could be made for the TDS deducted for the respective assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. Hence, the demand notices under Section 200A by the respondent-authority for intimation for payment of fee under Section 234E can be said as without any authority of law and the same are quashed and set aside to that extent. 25. As such, as recorded earlier, it is on account of the intimation received under Section 200A for making computation and demand of fees under Section 234E, the same has necessitated the appellant to challenge the constitutional validity of Section 234E. When the intimation of the demand notices under Section 200A is held to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or computation and intimation for payment of fee under Section 234E as they relate to for the period of the tax deducted prior to 1.6.2015 are set aside. It is clarified that the present judgment would not be interpreted to mean that even if the payment of the fees under Section 234E already made as per demand/intimation under Section 200A of the Act for the TDS for the period prior to 01.04.2015 is permitted to be reopened for claiming refund. The judgment will have prospective effect accordingly. It is further observed that the question of constitutional validity of Section 234E shall remain open to be considered by the Division Bench and shall not get concluded by the order of the learned Single Judge. 9. The ratio of the above decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
