2018 (9) TMI 1092
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the assessee is as follows:- "The learned CIT(A)-8 is unjustified & erred iin law by confirming the imposing of late filing levy by ACIT [CPC-TDS) of Rs. 30800/- u/s 234E determined to be payable by processing TDS statement u/s 200A, without issuing show cause notice. The late fee u/s 234E is penal in nature which cannot be levied without passing of speaking order just by processing TDS statement." 3. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. 4. The period of delay in question is prior to 1st June 2015, i.e. prior to the period in which the relevant amendment in section 200A was made. On these facts, there is no dispute that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eeding 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 sub-section (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 the amount of tax deductible....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 of the financial year in which the statement is filed. Explanation : For the purposes of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 before us is the intimation under section 200A of the Act, as stated in so many words in the impugned intimation itself, and, as the law stood, prior to 1st Ju....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ould 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 filed on 19th February 2014, such a levy could only have been made at best within 31st March 2015. That time has already elapsed and the defect is thus not curable even at this s....
TaxTMI
TaxTMI