Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2022 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 1291 - HC - Income TaxLate filing fee under section 234E - Intimation u/s 200A and the implications of the amendment brought in to the Act - HELD THAT:- In the decision in M/s.Sarala Memorial Hospital v. Union of India [2018 (12) TMI 1818 - KERALA HIGH COURT] 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. As regards the contention on the delay, though the said contention 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.Gupta's case [1987 (5) TMI 383 - SUPREME COURT] the issue related to seniority and petitioners challenged the orders of confirmation and determination of inter se seniority only after 15 years. In the decision in Bhailal Bhai's case [1964 (1) TMI 33 - SUPREME COURT] the question related to refund of tax claimed belatedly. None of those cases related to a total lack of jurisdiction or authority.
|