TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 489X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision of statute is to be read as having prospective effect and not retrospective effect, and accordingly decided the issue in favour of the assessee. Thus we hold that the late fee levied is unsustainable, accordingly we set aside the orders of the lower authorities and delete the late fee levied by the AO. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A.No.578/Viz/2019 to 582/Viz/2019 (Assessment Year:2014-15 & 2015-16) - - - Dated:- 31-5-2021 - SHRI N.K.CHOUDHRY, HON BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessee by: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate. Revenue by: Smt.Suman Malik, DR ORDER Per D.S. Sunder Singh, Accountant Member : These appeals are filed by the assessee against the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Hon ble Karnataka High Court and argued that no computation of fee for the demand or intimation u/s 234E could be made for TDS deducted for the respective assessment year prior to 01.06.2015. The Ld.AR further submitted that when there are divergent decisions of Hon ble High Courts, the decision most favourable to the assessee has to be adopted as held by Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Vegetable Products Ltd. (88 ITR 192) and hence requested to allow the appeals of the assessee. 4. Per contra, the Ld.DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 5 We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh Kourani (supra) decided the issue in favour of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d under Section 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period of the respective assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. However, we make it clear that, if any deductor has already paid the fee after intimation received under Section 200A, the aforesaid view will not permit the deductor to reopen the said question unless he has made payment under protest. 23. In view of the aforesaid observation and discussion, since the impugned intimation given by the respondent-Department against all the appellants under Section 200A are so far as they are for the period prior to 1.6.2015 can be said as without any authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
