Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2020 (9) TMI 189 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        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

        Tribunal overturns late fee & interest under tax laws, favoring taxpayer in conflicting decisions. The Tribunal held that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified in confirming the late fee levied under Section 234E by the Assessing ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Tribunal overturns late fee & interest under tax laws, favoring taxpayer in conflicting decisions.

                            The Tribunal held that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified in confirming the late fee levied under Section 234E by the Assessing Officer for periods before 01.06.2015. The Tribunal directed the deletion of the fee and interest levied under Section 220(2), allowing the appeals filed by the assessee based on the principle of favoring the assessee in cases of conflicting judicial decisions.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Levy of late filing fee under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act.
                            2. Applicability of Section 200A(1)(c) for computation of late filing fee.
                            3. Validity of Section 234E and its retrospective application.
                            4. Rule of consistency in judicial decisions.
                            5. Constitutionality of Section 234E.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Levy of Late Filing Fee under Section 234E:
                            The primary issue in these appeals is the levy of late filing fee under Section 234E by the Assessing Officer (AO), which was confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. The appeals pertain to TDS statements filed for periods before 01.06.2015. The Tribunal examined whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming the levy of late fee under Section 234E for delays in filing TDS statements.

                            2. Applicability of Section 200A(1)(c) for Computation of Late Filing Fee:
                            The Tribunal considered whether the AO was empowered to levy fees under Section 234E while issuing intimation under Section 200A of the Act for periods before the amendment of Section 200A(1) by the Finance Act, 2015, which introduced clause (c) effective from 01.06.2015. The Tribunal referenced the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Fatehraj Singhvi vs. UOI, which held that the amendment to Section 200A(1) is prospective and not applicable to periods before 01.06.2015. The Tribunal also noted that the Gujarat High Court in Rajesh Kourani vs. UOI upheld the levy of fee under Section 234E even before the amendment.

                            3. Validity of Section 234E and Its Retrospective Application:
                            The Tribunal highlighted that Section 234E, which imposes a fee for delayed filing of TDS statements, is a charging provision effective from 01.07.2012. The Tribunal noted that the machinery provision under Section 200A, which enables the computation of this fee, was introduced later. The Tribunal emphasized that the charging provision precedes the machinery provision, and the fee under Section 234E was always leviable from the date of its introduction, irrespective of the amendment to Section 200A.

                            4. Rule of Consistency in Judicial Decisions:
                            The Tribunal discussed the rule of consistency, referencing the decision of the Delhi High Court in Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd vs. DCIT, which stated that the rule of consistency should not create anomalies. The Tribunal acknowledged conflicting decisions from different High Courts on the issue but followed the principle that in the absence of a jurisdictional High Court decision, the decision favoring the assessee should be followed, as held by the Supreme Court in Vegetable Products Ltd.

                            5. Constitutionality of Section 234E:
                            The Tribunal addressed the argument regarding the constitutionality of Section 234E. The Tribunal noted that various High Courts, including the Gujarat High Court in Rajesh Kourani and the Bombay High Court in Rashmikant Kundalia vs. UOI, have upheld the constitutional validity of Section 234E, stating that it is not ultra vires or violative of the constitution. The Tribunal reiterated that the fee under Section 234E is compensatory and not penal in nature.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal concluded that the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the late fee levied by the AO under Section 234E for periods before 01.06.2015. The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and directed the deletion of the fee levied under Section 234E and the interest thereon under Section 220(2). The appeals filed by the assessee were allowed, following the principle of favoring the assessee in cases of conflicting judicial decisions.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found