TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 65X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an not be levied u/s 234E of the Act for late filling of TDS Return which pertains to the period prior to 01-06-2015 and consequently inclined to delete the late fees of Rs. 32800/- levied by the AO and affirmed by the ld. CIT(A). Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed. - I.T.A. No.501/Mum/2023 - - - Dated:- 27-4-2023 - Shri Br Baskaran, AM And Shri N K Choudhry, JM For the Appellant : Shri Hiten Dedhia For the Respondent : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. AR. ORDER PER N K CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This Appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 30.01.2023 impugned herein passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax, NFAC Delhi (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income tax Act 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 31-10-2022}, citation (2023) 147 taxmann.com 443(Jabalpur-Trib). 5. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. In the instant case issue relates to the levy of late fee qua delay in filling of TDS statement pertaining to the FY/period prior to amendment brought by way of finance Act, 2015 which came into effect from 1st June 2015. 5.1 The Ld. Commissioner affirmed the said levy of late fees, by relying upon various judgments including passed by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh Kourani Vs. UOI (supra) wherein levy of late fee qua delay in filling of TDS return pertaining to the period prior to 01-06-2015 was upheld. 5.2 The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Sing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ews of different High Courts, has been settled by the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of CIT VS. M/s. Vegetables Products Ltd. (88 ITR 192) by laying the dictum that if two reasonable constructions of a taxing provision are possible that construction which favours the Assessee must be adopted. Meaning thereby when two different views of Court are available on an issue, then the view which favors the Assessee or the judgment which favours the Assessee should be followed. 5.5 Admittedly there is no contrary judgment of the jurisdictional High Court against the Assessee on the issue under consideration hence, by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi Ors. vs. Union of India (2016) 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
