9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 1424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee for filing of appeal against the order of the ld.CIT(A), the ld.counsel for the assessee advised that no fruitful result will come if the appeal is being filed. However, later on, when the Amristar Bench of the Tribunal has given decision in the case of Sibia Healthcare P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT on similar issue, he was advised to file the appeal. The assessee has acted bona fide on the advice of its counsel and could not file the appeal well in time. 3. On due considerations of all the facts and circumstances, we are of the view that there is no deliberate attempt at the end of the assessee to adopt dilatory strategy. It acted under a wrong presumption and wrong advice. Therefore, we condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 1981 of 2014] and of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Rashmikant Kundalia Vs Union of India [WP No. 771 of 2014], granting stay on the demands raised in respect of fees under section 234E. The full text of these decisions were not produced before us. However, as admittedly there are no orders from the Hon'ble Courts above retraining us from our adjudication on merits in respect of the issues in this appeal, and as, in our humble understanding, this appeal requires adjudication on a very short legal issue, within a narrow compass of material facts, we are proceeding to dispose of this appeal on merits. 5. We may produce, for ready reference, section 234E of the Act, which was inserted by the Finance Act 2012 and was brought int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statement, has been made by a person deducting any sum (hereafter referred to in this section as deductor) under section 200, such statement shall be processed in the following manner, namely:- (a) the sums deductible under this Chapter shall be computed after making the following adjustments, namely:- (i) any arithmetical error in the statement; or (ii) an incorrect claim, apparent from any information in the statement; (b) the interest, if any, shall be computed on the basis of the sums deductible as computed in the statement; (c) the sum payable by, or the amount of refund due to, the deductor shall be determined after adjustment of amount computed under clause (b) against any amount paid under section 200 and section 201, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the following clauses shall be substituted with effect from the 1st day of June, 2015, namely:- "(c) the fee, if any, shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of section 234E; (d) the sum payable by, or the amount of refund due to, the deductor shall be determined after adjustment of the amount computed under clause (b) and clause (c) against any amount paid under section 200 or section 201 or section 234E and any amount paid otherwise by way of tax or interest or fee; (e) an intimation shall be prepared or generated and sent to the deductor specifying the sum determined to be payable by, or the amount of refund due to, him under clause (d); and (f) the amount of refund due to the deductor in pursuance of the dete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idered view, the adjustment in respect of levy of fees under section 234E was indeed beyond the scope of permissible adjustments contemplated under section 200A. This intimation is an appealable order under section 246A(a), and, therefore, the CIT(A) ought to have examined legality of the adjustment made under this intimation in the light of the scope of the section 200A. Learned CIT(A) has not done so. He has justified the levy of fees on the basis of the provisions of Section 234E. That is not the issue here. The issue is whether such a levy could be effected in the course of intimation under section 200A. The answer is clearly in negative. No other provision enabling a demand in respect of this levy has been pointed out to us and it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee gets the relief accordingly." 7. The ld.DR has not brought to our notice any other judgment negating the above finding of the Tribunal or persuade us to deviate from the view taken by the Tribunal in the above order, on the issue of levy of late fee under section 234E of the Act. Therefore, following the order of the Tribunal in the case of Dharti Associates Vs. DCIT, (supra), which in turn followed the order of Amristar Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sibia Healthcare P.Ltd. (supra), we allow appeal of the assessee and delete the levy of late fee imposed under section 234E of the Act of Rs.50,400/- for the quarter-2 in the F.Y. 2013-14. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
