2017 (12) TMI 1721

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Commissioner of Income Tax regarding the alleged failure of the petitioner to deduct the Tax at Source and the levy of interest under Section 234E was made in the impugned intimation resulting in demand against thepetitioner-assessee. 2. However, the learned counsels for both the parties have brought to the notice of the Court that the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors, since reported in (2016) 142 DTR Judgments 281 has held that no such interest can be levied under Section 234E of the Act. The relevant paras 23 to 27 are quotedbelow for ready reference:- "23. In view of the aforesaid observation and discussion, since the impugned intimation given by the respondent-Depar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me has necessitated the appellant to challenge the constitutional validity of Section 234E. When the intimation of the demand notices under Section 200A is held to be without authority of law so far as it relates to computation and demand of fee under Section 234E, we find that the question of further scrutiny for testing the constitutional validity of Section 234E would be rendered as an academic exercise because there would not be any cause on the part of the petitioners to continue to maintain the challenge to constitutional validity under Section 234E of the Act. At this stage, we may also record that the learned counsels appearing for the appellant had also declared that if the impugned notices under Section 200A are set aside, so far ....