2016 (9) TMI 960

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....6 2 There is a delay of 3 days in filing this appeal. The assessee society had filed condonation petition along with an affidavit of Sr. Mary Jincy, who is the President of the assessee society. 3 We have perused the affidavit filed by Sr Mary Jincy and are convinced that there is sufficient reasons for belated filing of the appeal and the delay was not deliberate and no latches can be attributed to the assessee's society in filing the appeal belatedly. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 4 The grounds raised as follows: 1. That the Ld. Assessing officer (TDSCPC) had levied a late fees of Rs. 66,080 1- & issued order Vis 200A of the Act. 2. Prior to 01.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issioner of Central Processing Cell (TDS) observed that there is a delay in filing the statement and imposed late fee u/s 234E of the Act amounting to Rs. 42,210/- and Rs. 22,870/- for the 2nd and 3rd quarters of Financial Year 2012-13. 6 Aggrieved by the imposition of late fee u/s 234E of the Act, the assessee preferred appeal to the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) confirmed the imposition of late fee and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 7 Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. The ld counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the income tax authorities. The ld DR present was duly heard. 8 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on recor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in the case of Sibia Healthcare (P) Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2015) 61 Taxmann.com 70 and held that levy of fee u/s. 234E is beyond the scope of permissible adjustments contemplated u/s.200A. The relevant portion of the order of the Amritsar Bench of the Tribunal reads as follows: "In view of the above discussions, in our considered view, the adjustment in respect of levy of fees under section 234E was indeed beyond the scope of permissible adjustments contemplated under section 200A. This intimation is an appealable order under section 246A(1 )(a), and, therefore, the CIT(A) ought to have examined legality of the adjustment made under this intimation in the light of the scope of the section 200A. Leamed CIT(A)....