Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal allows appeals challenging late filing fees under Income Tax Act Section 234E</h1> <h3>M/s. Rajyas Software Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Champak Mines and Minerals, M/s. Tayani Minerals Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Padgilwar Agro Industries, M/s. Minor Irrigation, M/s. Audarya Construction Pvt. Ltd. And Ors., M/s. Shri Salasar Digital Pvt. Ltd., Mr. Uttam Singh Rauthan Versus ACIT</h3> M/s. Rajyas Software Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Champak Mines and Minerals, M/s. Tayani Minerals Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Padgilwar Agro Industries, M/s. Minor Irrigation, ... Issues Involved:1. Condonation of Delay2. Levy of Late Filing Fees under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961A. Preliminary Issue - Condonation of DelayAt the outset, the Tribunal noted that some of the appeals were time-barred by three days. The assessee filed an affidavit along with a condonation of delay petition. Upon reviewing the petition and affidavit, the Tribunal found the reasons for the delay justified and not attributable to any deliberate conduct by the assessee. The delay was beyond the control of the assessee, and the Revenue had no objection to the condonation. Consequently, the Tribunal condoned the delay and proceeded to hear the appeals on merits.B. Merits of the IssueThe core issue in these appeals was the levy of late filing fees under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Assessing Officer (AO) during the processing of TDS statements under Section 200A.1. Legislative Amendment and Its Applicability:- The Tribunal noted that Clause (c) to Section 200A(1) was inserted specifically from 01.06.2015. The assessee argued that since the amendment was not clarificatory or retrospective, late filing fees could not be charged for TDS statements filed before or after 01.06.2015 based on the new amendment.- The Tribunal acknowledged that Section 234E, introduced by the Finance Act, 2012 effective from 01.07.2012, enabled the levy of late filing fees. However, the unamended Section 200A did not empower officers to charge such fees until the amendment in 2015.2. Judicial Precedents:- The Tribunal referenced several judicial precedents, including decisions from the Pune Bench of the Tribunal and the Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi, which held that the amendment to Section 200A was prospective. Therefore, the AO lacked jurisdiction to levy late filing fees for periods before 01.06.2015, even if the TDS statements were filed or processed after this date.- The Tribunal highlighted key judgments:- C & M Farming Ltd. vs. ACIT: The AO cannot charge late fees under Section 234E for periods before 01.06.2015.- Medical Superintendent Rural Hospital vs. DCIT: Late filing fees cannot be charged for periods before 01.06.2015, even if the TDS returns were filed or processed after this date.- Fatheraj Singhvi vs. Union of India: The amendment to Section 200A is prospective, and fees under Section 234E cannot be demanded for periods before 01.06.2015.- Alpha Electronics Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT: Reiterated that late filing fees under Section 234E cannot be levied for periods before 01.06.2015.3. Specific Case Analysis:- The Tribunal reviewed the specific details of the quarters involved, due dates, and actual filing dates of TDS statements for the financial years 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15. It was found that most TDS statements were filed before 01.06.2015, with a few exceptions where they were filed after this date.- The Tribunal directed the AO to closely examine the facts, dates of defaults, and claims of the assessee to ensure correct application of the law. If the defaults pertained to periods after 01.06.2015, the provisions for late filing fees under Section 234E read with Section 200A would apply.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the late filing fees charged by the AO were unsustainable in law for periods before 01.06.2015 due to lack of jurisdiction. All 111 appeals were allowed, and the AO was directed to re-examine the cases with the correct application of the law.Order Pronounced:The order was pronounced in open Court on 31st January 2020.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found