TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (6) TMI 1398
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng of these appeals by this consolidated order. 2. The short issue involved in all these appeals is assessee's grievance against learned CIT(A)'s upholding the levy under section 234E in the course of processing of TDS returns and intimation under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Learned Representatives fairly agree that this issue is no longer res integra. A Division Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Sibia Healthcare Private Limited vs. DCIT - ITA No.90/Asr/2015, vide order dated 9th June, 2015 ((2015) 171 TTJ 145 (Asr.) has decided this issue in favour of the assessee by inter alia holding as follows:- "4. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered fact....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re 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 or collectible, as the case may be. (3) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall be paid before delivering or causing to be delivered a statement in accordance with sub-section (3) of section 200 or the proviso to sub-section (3) of section 206C. (4) The provisions of this section shall apply to a statement refe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enerated 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 this sub-section, "an incorrect claim apparent from any information in the statement" shall mean a claim, on the basis of an entry, in the statement-- (i) of an item, which is inconsistent with another entry of the same or some other item in such s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der 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 June 2015, there was no enabling provision therein for raising a demand in respect of levy of fees under section 234E. While examining the correctness of the intimation under section 200A, we have....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s 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 stage. In view of these discussions, as also bearing in mind entirety of the case, the impugned levy of fees under section 234 E is unsustainable in law. W....