9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 634X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of TDS for the assessment years prior to 01/06/2015. This view is supported by the decision of Hon ble Karnataka High Court in case of Fatheraj Singhvi [ 2016 (9) TMI 964 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ]. Late fee under section 234B cannot be levied for a period up to 01/06/2015. In the present years under consideration, interest u/s 234B is not leviable for asst. year 2013-14 2014-15. However for asst. year 2015-16 the amended provisions would be applicable. In respect of asst. year 2015-16, no interest would be chargeable for the first quarter. We therefore direct Ld.AO to delete the addition made under section 234B of the Act in the hands of assessee for the relevant assessment years under consideration. - Decided in favour of assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pect of the aforesaid assessment years and demanded the late fee under Section 234E of the Act. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Section 234E was introduced with effect from 01.07.2012. However, the mechanism to levy such late fee was introduced by virtue of the amendment to Section 200A with effect from 01.06.2015. Hence, the said levy of late fee in respect of the period prior to 01.06.2015 is illegal. 5. In support of his contentions, learned counsel placed reliance on the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi and ors vs. Union of India and ors. (Writ Appeal Nos. 2663 to 2674 of 2015 and allied matters) as well as the order of the cognate Bench in W.P.No.9049/2015 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne, 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 be without authority of law so far as it relates to computation and demand of fee under section 234E, we find that the question of further scrutiny for testing the constitutional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 1st April, 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. 8. The said judgment has been followed by the cognate Bench in W.P.No.9049/2015 and connected matters referred to supra. 9. In view of the settled legal position as aforesaid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
