2016 (10) TMI 1222

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se, the ld. CIT (A) erred in not holding the intimation issued u/s 200A, raising a demand of Rs. 4,200/- by applying the provision the section 234E, as bad in law. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the levy of fees u/s 234E of Rs. 4,200/-. However, the same is not justified and deserves to be withdrawn. ITA No. 723/JP/2016 : 1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (A) erred in not holding the intimation issued u/s 200A, raising a demand of Rs. 16,850/- by applying the provision the section 234E, as bad in law. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the levy of fees u/s 234E of Rs. 16,850/-. However, the same i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng judicial pronouncements :- Shri Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors (Writ Appeal No. 2663-2674/2015(T-IT) 73 taxmann.com 252 (Kar.HC) Gajanan Constructions vs. DCIT (73 taxmann.com 380)(ITAT Pune) Smt. G. Indhirani vs. DCIT (60 taxmann.com 312)(ITAT Chennai) Maharashtra Cricket Association vs. DCIT (74 taxmann.com 6)(ITAT Pune) Sibia Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (61 taxmann.com 70) (ITAT Amritsar) Dhanlaxmi Developers vs. DCIT (ITA No. 2888 to 2891/Ahd/2015)(ITAT Ahmedabad) He further argued that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. (49 taxmann.com 249) has discussed in detail the general principle of concerning retrospectively and held that unless contrar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd merit into the contention of ld. Counsel that he jurisdictional High Court has decided the validity of section 234E, but has not decide the issue of power of AO for levy of tax under section 234E in the judgment rendered in the case of M/s. Dundlod Shikshan Sansthan and Others (supra) as relied by ld. CIT (A). We have considered the recent decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Shri Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors (supra) wherein the issue of levy of fees u/s 234E on statements processed u/s 200A before 01.06.2015 has been categorically discussed by the Hon'ble High Court and in para 24 of the said order it was held that "no demand for fee u/s 234E can be made in intimation issued for TDS deducted u/s 200A before 01.06.2015". We ....