2021 (3) TMI 634

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rt being aggrieved by the orders dated 25.3.2015, 27.3.2015 and 26.5.2015 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax relating to financial years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 (notice issued under Section 234E) relating to TDS has approached this Court. 3. Learned Single Judge placing reliance of the judgment delivered in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi and Others Vs. Union of India and Others, reported in (2016) 73 taxmann.com 252 (Karnataka) has allowed the writ petition preferred by the respondent herein. 4. The order passed by the learned Single Judge in paragraphs No.3 to 9 reads as under: "3. The petitioner is claiming to be in the business of software development. The petitioner, in the course of its activities, makes payments to p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty under law. Hence, the same can be said and illegal and invalid. 24. If the facts of the present cases are examined in light of the aforesaid observation and discussion, it appears that in all matters, the intimation given in purported exercise of power under section 200A are in respect of fees under section 234E for the period prior to 1st June, 2015. As such, it is on account of the intimation given making demand of the fees in purported exercise of power under section 200A, the same has necessitated the appellant-original petitioner to challenge the validity of section 234E of the Act. In view of the reasons recorded by us herein above, when the amendment made under section 200A of the Act which has come into effect on 1st June, 2015....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he challenge to the constitutional validity of section 234E of the Act. But, they submitted that the question of constitutional validity of section 234E may be kept open to be considered by the Division Bench and the judgment of the learned Single Judge may not conclude the constitutional validity of section 234E of the Act.   26. Under these circumstances, we find that no further discussion would be required for examining the constitutional validity of section 234E of the Act. Save and except to observe that the question of constitutional validity of section 234E of the Act before the Division Bench of this Court shall remain open and shall not be treated as concluded. 27. In view of the aforesaid observations and discussion, the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi and Others (supra). 6. In the considered opinion of this Court, once the issue involved in the present case stood concluded on account of the judgment delivered by Division Bench of this Court, there appears to be no justification in taking a different view. At this stage, the learned counsel drawn our attention towards the judgment delivered by High Court of Gujarat in the case of Rajesh Kourani Vs. Union of India reported in (2017) 83 taxmann.com 137 (Gujarat). This Court has gone through the judgment delivered by the Gujarat High Court and the Gujarat High Court has held that the machinery for calculating the late fee came into effect at a later stage. The provision for calculating the late fee was in e....