TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 949X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be applied retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided in the Act, to levy the late fee for any delay in filing the TDS statement for the period prior to 01.06.2015. The counsel for the assessee has rightly contended that in the absence of enabling provisions u/s 200A of the Act, such levy of late fee is not valid As relying on M/S. TERRA INFRA DEVELOPMENT LIMITED [ 2018 (10) TMI 285 - ITAT HYDERABAD] we find that the TDS returns filed by the assessee for the relevant period i.e., FY 2012-13 relevant to AY 2013-14 were prior to 01/06/2015. Therefore, respectfully following the said decision of the coordinate bench, we set aside the orders of CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the fees levied u/s 234E in all the appeals under consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeals is that the CIT(A) erred in upholding the late fee levied by the AO u/s 234E. 4. Brief facts of the case are, the assessee company filed its statements in Form No. 26Q for Quarters 2, 3 4 for FY 2012-13 relevant to AYs 2013-14. On verification of these statements, the AO noticed that the assessee filed all these statements, belatedly and hence, raised a demand in the said FY on account of late filing levy u/s 234E by issuing intimations u/s 200A. 5. Against the said action of AO, assessee preferred appeals before the CIT(A) raising a ground that the provisions to include late fee u/s 234E in Intimation u/s 200A is not permissible under law and consequently such levy is unsustainable in law and hence the levy is liable to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovision in the Act u/s 200A for raising demand in respect of levy of fee u/s 234E of the Act. The provision of Section 234E of the Act is charging provision i.e. substantive provision which could not be applied retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided in the Act, to levy the late fee for any delay in filing the TDS statement for the period prior to 01.06.2015. The counsel for the assessee has rightly contended that in the absence of enabling provisions u/s 200A of the Act, such levy of late fee is not valid. 9.2 We find that similar issue came up for consideration before the coordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s Terra Infra Development Ltd., Hyderabad in ITA Nos. 1876 1875/Hyd/2017 for AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15, o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... two divergent view of the Hon'ble High Courts on the issue and in the absence of any decision by the jurisdictional High Court, we concur with the learned Counsel for the assessee that as per the well accepted rule of construction, if two reasonable constructions of a statute are possible the construction which favours the assessee must be adopted. In view of the same, respectfully following the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi (Supra), we hold that the fees levied in all the present cases u/s 234E prior to 01.06.2015 in the intimations made u/s 200A was without authority of law and the same is therefore, directed to be deleted. In view of the above, all the appeals of the assessee stand allowed . ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
