TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 1148
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....are that assessee failed to submit TDS return for quarter no.4 in Form No.26Q for quarter no. 4. While processing the return, DCIT, CPC, TDS, Gaziabad has levied a fee of Rs. 16,504/- upon the assessee. 4. Appeal to the ld. CIT(A) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 5. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee, at the very outset, contended that this issue has been considered elaborately by ITAT, Amristar Bench in the case of Sibia Healthcare Pvt.Ltd. Vs. DCIT. He placed on record the copy of ITAT, Ahmedabad in case of ITA No.3274-3276/Ahd/2014, wherein the order of ITAT, Amristar Bench in the case of Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, ITA No.90/Asr/2015 order dated 09.06.2015 has been reproduced. 6. The ld. D.R. relied upon ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., we are proceeding to dispose of this appeal on merits. 5. We may produce, for ready reference, section 234E of the Act, which was inserted by the Finance Act 2012 and was brought into effect from 1st July 2012. This statutory provision is as follows: 234E. Fee for defaults in furnishing statements (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of the Act, where a person fails to deliver or cause to be delivered a statement within the time prescribed in subsection (3) of section 200 or the proviso to subsection (3) of section 206C, he shall be liable to pay, by way of fee, a sum of two hundred rupees for every day during which the failure continues. (2) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall not exceed t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s deductible as computed in the statement; (c) the sum payable by, or the amount of refund due to, the deductor shall be determined after adjustment of amount computed under clause (b) against any amount paid under section 200 and section 201, and any amount paid otherwise by way of tax or interest; (d) an intimation shall be prepared or generated and sent to the deductor specifying the sum determined to be payable by, or the amount of refund due to, him under clause (c); and (e) the amount of refund due to the deductor in pursuance of the determination under clause (c) shall be granted to the deductor: Provided that no intimation under this sub-section shall be sent after the expiry of one year from the end....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 234E and any amount paid otherwise by way of tax or interest or fee; (e) an intimation shall be prepared or generated and sent to the deductor specifying the sum determined to be payable by, or the amount of refund due to, him under clause (d); and (f) the amount of refund due to the deductor in pursuance of the determination under clause (d) shall be granted to the deductor. 8. In effect thus, post 1st June 2015, in the course of processing of a TDS statement and issuance of intimation under section 200A in respect thereof, an adjustment could also be made in respect of the "fee, if any, shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of section 234E". There is no dispute that what is impugned in appeal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Learned CIT(A) has not done so. He has justified the levy of fees on the basis of the provisions of Section 234E. That is not the issue here. The issue is whether such a levy could be effected in the course of intimation under section 200A. The answer is clearly in negative. No other provision enabling a demand in respect of this levy has been pointed out to us and it is thus an admitted position that in the absence of the enabling provision under section 200A, no such levy could be effected. As intimation under section 200A, raising a demand or directing a refund to the tax deductor, can only be passed within one year from the end of the financial year within which the related TDS statement is filed, and as the related TDS statement was ....