TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 1648
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-15. 2. Since the common issue is raised in all the appeals, therefore, the same are heard together and for the sake of convenience and brevity, a common order is being passed. 3. For the purposes of facts, we take ITA No. 738/JP/2016 pertaining to A.Y. 2013-14. In this appeal, the assessee has raised only one effective ground, which is as under:- "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has legally and factually erred in confirming late filing fee of Rs. 48,402/- charged by the ld. A.O. U/s 234E of the IT Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that during the relevant period there was no such provision in Section 200A of the IT Act, 1961 for charging such late filing fee wile processing the quarterly statement file....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ience Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT in ITA No. 2957 to 2963/Ahd/2015 and the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi & ors. Vs Union of India & Ors. (2016) 289 CTR (Kar) 602. 7. On the contrary, the ld DR has opposed the submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. She relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court rendered in the case of Dundlod Shikshan Sansthan Vs. Union of India (2015) 63 taxmann.com 243 (Raj.). 8. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties, perused the material available on the record and also gone through the orders of the authorities below. Recently the Coordinate Bench of Jaipur ITAT in the case of M/s. Sandeep Jhanwar Advisory Servic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gments of Hon'ble Supreme Court and Hon'ble Karnataka High Court, we set aside the order of ld. CIT (A) and direct the AO to drop the demand raised of Rs. 4,200/- u/s 234E on statements processed u/s 200A before 01.06.2015. Thus grounds raised by the assessee are allowed." The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Dundlod Shikshan Sansthan Vs. Union of India (supra) has decided the issue of vires of Section 234E of the Act. The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi & ors. Vs Union of India & Ors. (supra) has held that the demand U/s 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee U/s 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power U/s 200A for the period of the respective assessment years ....