2020 (3) TMI 1249

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of penalty u/s 234E of the Income tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'The Act' for short]. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of notice issued nor there in any application for adjournment. Therefore, we decided to proceed ex parte. 4. Having heard the ld. DR who strongly supported the findings of the Assessing Officer. we have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. 5. The main contention of the assessee, as culled out from the orders of the authorities below are that: "7. As per the provisions of Sec. 234E made applicable w.e.f. 1st July, 2012 states that "Amount of late fee shall be paid before delivering a TDS statement". Th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Finance Act, 2015, prior to 01.06.2015, your good self had no authority to levy fee, if any, under Section 234E of the Act and thus  levy of fee under Section 234E of the Act while processing the statement is beyond the scope of Section 200A of the Act. * Thus, the demand raised by the Ld. Assessing officer which relates to the Section 234E which is charged as late filing of return charging Rs. 200 per day is unjustified and should be deleted." 6. We have given thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. We find force in the written contentions of the ld. counsel for the assessee. The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors 289 CTR 602 had the occasion to consider ....