TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 1061X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sri.O.Ramachandran Nambiar Sri.Geen T.Mathew, Sri.G.Hariharan Sri.Praveen.H. Respondent: Sri.D.Sreekumar Shri.P.Vijayakumar, Asg Of India Smt.T.S.Maya (Thiyadil), Sri Christopher Abraham, Sri.M.A.Vinod, Cgc JUDGMENT S.V. Bhatti, J. Heard Standing Counsel Mr Christopher Abraham, Adv. O Ramachandran Nambiar, Adv D S Sreekumaran and Adv. G Hariharan for parties. 2. The instant batch cases deal with an issue arising in the background of requirement of clause (c) of Section 200A(1) read with Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'). W.A. No.600/2017 challenges the constitutional validity of Section 234E of the Act. The cases have been heard as batch matters. Though the petitioners/assessees are separate, we prefer to dispose of the appeals/petition by this common judgment since the circumstances preceding the filing of the respective cases, grounds of challenge, etc are substantially same and similar. 2.1 W.A. Nos.722, 752 753/2019 are treated as lead matters, and the circumstances referred to and considered in W.A. No.722/2019 is stated as representative appeal. W.A.No.722/2019 3. The Income Tax Officer (TDS)/2nd respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 4. Mr Christopher Abraham reiterated the very argument which did not find favour in the judgment under appeal. According to him, Section 234E is rendered ineffective between the period 01.07.2012 and 31.05.2015 if the subject clause is held as operative with effect from 01.06.2015. 5. Adv D S Sreekumaran appearing for the writ petitioner contends that the CBDT Circular is one of the main reasons which convinced the learned Single Judge to accept the contention of petitioner. The respondent/Revenue does not deal with the effect and applicability of Circular referred to in the judgment for challenging the impugned judgment. 6. The grounds raised against the judgment under appeal are dealing with the very same arguments considered by the learned Single Judge. It is useful, at this juncture, to excerpt the operative portion of the learned Single Judge's judgment: 9. Interpreting Section 200A and Section 234E, the Karnataka High Court has held in Fatheraj that when the statute confers no express power under section 200A before 01.06.2015 on the authority either to compute and collect any fee under section 234E, the demand for the period before 01.06.2015 could not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ni, it does not seem to have considered the Circular No.19 of 2015, which in para 47.3 clarifies: 47.3 Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 inserted section 200A in the Income-tax Act which provides for processing of TDS statements for determining the amount payable or refundable to the deductor. However, as section 243E was inserted after the insertion of section 200A of the Income-tax Act, the existing provisions of section 200A of the Income Tax Act did not provide for determination of fee payable under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act at the time of processing of TDS statements. Therefore, the provisions of Section 200A of the Income Tax Act has been amended so as to enable computation of fee payable under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act at the time of processing of TDS Statement under Section 200A of the Income Tax Act. (italics supplied) 6.1 A Division Bench of Karnataka High Court in W.A. Nos.2663-2674/2015 was answering the question whether clause (c) of Section 200A(1) is prospective or retrospective. The Division Bench held as follows: 20. In view of the aforesaid observations and discussion, two aspects may transpire one, for Section 234E providing for fee an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 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 (t) of sub-section (1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the demand 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itrary, discriminatory, unreasonable and is violative of Article 14 and 19(g) of the Constitution of India. c), to declare that levy of FEE under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without granting an opportunity to the concerned person and also without vesting any powers on the Income Tax Officer to either waive or delete such fee is highly illegal, arbitrary and invalid. d). to issue a writ of certiorari or such other writ, direction or order quashing Exhibits P1, P1 (a), P1 (b), P1 (c); Exhibits P2, P2 (a), P2 (b), P2 (c); Exhibits P3, P3 (a), P3 (b), P3 (c) and Exhibits P4, P4 (a), P4 (b) intimations issued by the 3rd respondent to the petitioner. e), to issue a writ of certiorari or such other writ, direction or order quashing Exhibits P9 and P10 orders. f). to issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, direction or order restraining the respondents from enforcing Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the petitioner. g). to call for the entire records relating to Exhibits P9 and P10 orders. h). to award costs of the writ petition from the respondents. And i). to grant such and other reliefs as may be deemed just and necessar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
