TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 913
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Assessing Officer. Since the issue involved in these appeals is common, these appeals are clubbed, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. 2. The Assessees in both these appeals challenged the orders of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) in confirming levy of late fee u/s 234E of the Act for delay in filing the quarterly TDS statement in the form 26Q. These appeals are filed with a delay of 15 days and petitions for condonation of delay were filed explaining the reasons as to why the delay occurred. The Ld. DR has no serious objection in condoning the delay. The Assessees have sufficient cause in filing the appeal with delay. Therefore, we condone the delay of 15 days and admit the appeals for hearin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate fee u/s 234E cannot be charged while processing quarterly return u/s 200A of the Act observing as under : "28. The perusal of Memo explaining the provision relating to insertion of clause (c) to section 200A of the Act clarifies the intention of Legislature in inserting the said provision. The provisions of section 234E of the Act were inserted by the Finance Act, 2012, under which the provision was made for levy of fees for late furnishing TDS / TCS statements. Before insertion of section 234E of the Act, the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 had inserted section 200A in the Act, under the said section, mechanism was provided for processing of TOS statements for determining the amount payable or refundable to the deductor, under which ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....c) to section 200A(1) of the Act w.e.f. 01 .06.2015, then in such cases, the Assessing Officer is not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act while processing the TDS returns filed by the deductor. 29. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Rashmikant Kundalia Vs. Union of India (supra) has upheld the constitutional validity of said section introduced by the Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015 but was not abreast of the applicability of the said section 234E of the Act by the Assessing Officer while processing TDS statement filed by the deductor prior to 01.06.2015. In such scenario, we find no merit in the plea of learned CIT-DR that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Rashmikant Kundalia Vs. Union of India (supra) h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., applicable for pending assessments. 31. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has explained the general principle concerning retrospectivity and have held that "of the various rules guiding how a legislation has to be interpreted, one established rule is that unless contrary intention appears, a legislation is presumed not to be intended to have a retrospective operation. Idea behind the rule is that current law should govern current activities The Memo explaining the Finance Bill, 2015 very dearly also recognizes that and refers to the current provisions of sub-section (3) to section 200 of the Act, under which the deductor is to furnish TDS statements. However, as section 234E of the Act was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... insertion categorically being made w.e.f. 01.06.2015 lays down that the said amendment is prospective in nature and cannot be applied to processing of TDS returns I statements prior to 01.06.2015. 32. We further find that in recent judgment dated 26.08.2016, the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Writ Appeal Nos. 2663-2674/2015(T- IT) & Ors in Sri Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors has quashed the intimation issued under section 200A of the Act levying the fees for delayed filing the TDS statements under section 234E of the Act. The Hon'ble High Court notes that the Finance Act. 2015 had made amendments to section 200A of the Act enabling the Assessing Officer to make adjustments while levying fees under section ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ficer, TDS Ward in ITA Nos.4740 and 4741/Mum/2016 dated 1.3.2017 held as under : "6.2 Following the above referred decision of the Hon'ble ITAT Pune Bench in the case of Gajanan Constructions and others in ITA Nos. 1292 & 1293/PN/2015 and others dated 23.09.2016, we hold that the amendment to section 200A(1) of the Act is prospective in nature and therefore the AO while processing the TDS statements/ returns in the present three appeals for the period prior to 01.06.20 15 was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Therefore the intimations issued by the AO under section 200A of the Act in these appeals are unsustainable and the demand raised by way of charging of the fees under section 234E of the Act not being....