https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419265 Late fee under Section 234E was levied through intimation under Section 200A for belated e-TDS returns, and the revision under Section 264 was rejected as time-barred. The Karnataka HC noted that the assessee had already pursued rectification and appellate remedies, and that an earlier binding decision had held such fee could not be computed for the relevant prior period. It found that the revisional authority should not have taken a hyper-technical view of limitation and that the delay ought to have been condoned so the revision could be examined on merits. The rejection order was therefore set aside. en-us Wed, 12 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Mar 2022 08:44:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419265 Late fee under Section 234E was levied through intimation under Section 200A for belated e-TDS returns, and the revision under Section 264 was rejected as time-barred. The Karnataka HC noted that the assessee had already pursued rectification and appellate remedies, and that an earlier binding decision had held such fee could not be computed for the relevant prior period. It found that the revisional authority should not have taken a hyper-technical view of limitation and that the delay ought to have been condoned so the revision could be examined on merits. The rejection order was therefore set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 12 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419265