TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 whereas the due date is 15th May, 2016 which is after the date of insertion of specific provision for levy of late fee U/s. 234E ie., 01/06/2015. Therefore, the action taken by the Ld. AO in levying the late fee for default in furnishing the TDS statement beyond the stipulated time is in accordance with law. As well, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC without discussing the issue on merits, dismissed the assessee s appeal on the issue of condonation of delay. Therefore, have no hesitation to come to a conclusion that the orders of the Ld. Revenue Authorities invoking the provisions of section 234E in order to levy late fee for default in furnishing the TDS statement beyond the stipulated time is in accordance with law and accordingly the grounds raised by the assessee are hereby dismissed. - I.T.A. No.46 TO 67/Viz/2023 - - - Dated:- 31-3-2023 - Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon ble Judicial Member For the Appellant : Sri GVN Hari, Advocate For the Respondent : Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. AR ORDER PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER : All the captioned appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld. CIT(A)], ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . AR] that the enabling provision for computation of fee while processing the statements was inserted in section 200A only w.e.f 1/6/2015 and therefore, the charging section i.e., section 234E cannot be enforced prior to 1/6/2015. The Ld. AR further submitted that the amended provision applies for all the returns pertaining to the period after 1/6/2015 and not for the returns pertaining to the period prior to 01/06/2015 notwithstanding the fact that the returns pertaining to the period prior to 01/06/2015 were filed after 01/06/2015 or processed after 01/06/2015. The Ld. AR further submitted that in the present case (ITA No.46/Viz/2023), the due date for filing the TDS returns is 15/10/2012 (For Q2 of FY 2012-13) and the TDS returns were filed on 20/06/2013 therefore section 234E cannot be enforced since it is prior to 1/6/2015. The Ld. AR therefore submitted that the Ld. Revenue Authorities erred in levying and confirming the levy of late fee U/s. 234E of the Act while processing the TDS return U/s. 200A of the Act for the relevant period under consideration. In support of his view the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in the case of Rashmikant Kundalia vs. Union of India (supra) because of late filing of TDS statements Department is overburdened with extra work which is otherwise not required if the TDS statements are furnished within the prescribed time limit. The Ld. DR also heavily relied on the decision of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh Kourani vs. Union of India (supra) for the proposition that a machinery provision (section 200A) cannot override the substantive provision of law . The Ld. DR therefore pleaded that since the action taken by the Ld. Revenue Authorities is in accordance the provisions of the Act and also in accordance with law, as discussed above, and hence the order of the Ld. Revenue Authorities need not be disturbed / interfered with. 7. I have heard both the sides, perused the material available on record as well as the orders of the Ld. Revenue Authorities. The main question that arises in this appeal is whether TDS returns pertaining to the period prior to 01/06/2015, if filed after 01/06/2015 and processed after 01/06/2015 whether they attract the amended provisions of Finance Act, 2012 and the specific provision for levy of fee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at, a regulatory mechanism by insertion of any provision made in the statute book, may have a retroactive character but, whether such provision provides for a mere regulatory mechanism or confers substantive power upon the authority would also be a aspect which may be required to be considered before such provisions is held to be retroactive in nature. Further, when any provision is inserted for liability to pay any tax or the fee by way of compensatory in nature or fee independently simultaneously mode and the manner of its enforceability is also required to be considered and examined. Not only that, but, if the mode and the manner is not expressly prescribed, the provisions may also be vulnerable. All such aspects will be required to be considered before one considers regulatory mechanism or provision for regulating the mode and the manner of recovery and its enforceability as retroactive. If at the time when the fee was provided under Section 234E, the Parliament also provided for its utility for giving privilege under Section 271H(3) that too by expressly put bar for penalty under Section 272A by insertion of proviso to Section 272A(2), it can be said that a particular set up f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cessed the said TDS returns after June, 2015. Accordingly the demand raised by charging late filing fee u/s 234E of the Act is not valid and the same is deleted. 12. Thus, in the instant case since the period of default was before the said date ie., 01/06/2015, there is no merit in charging late filing fee U/s. 234E of the Act. Accordingly the Ld. AO is directed to delete the fee levied U/s. 234E of the Act in the order passed U/s. 200A of the Act. Since I hold that the no late filing fee is to be charged, the consequential interest charged U/s. 220(2) of the also does not survive. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 13. With respect to ITA Nos. 47 to 62/Viz/2023, the grounds of appeal as well as the issue raised in these appeals are identical to that the of the grounds and the issue raised in the appeal ITA No. 46/Viz/2023 , which is adjudicated in the above paragraphs of this order, my decision given thereof mutatis mutandis applies to the present appeals ( ITA Nos. 47 to 62/Viz/2023 ) also. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. 14. In the result, all the instant appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. ITA Nos. 63 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
