2022 (11) TMI 546

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....UMAR (A-1768) K.N.SREEKUMARAN N.SANTHOSHKUMAR RESPONDENTS: BY ADVS. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT SRI.MANU.S, CGC JUDGMENT As an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961, petitioner had deducted TDS, for payments made by him and remitted the same to the Income Tax Department. While filing the statement of returns regarding the remittance of TDS, delay occurred. When the ret....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion 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." 3. According to the petitioner, though section 234E of the Act was introduced by the Finance Act, 2012 with effect from 1st July, 2012, since petitioner is being demanded to pay, by Ext.P1 to Ext.P5, late fee for not filing the statement of tax deduction at source,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ers under section 246A of the Act and the petitioner failed to challenge the levy of late fee. In such circumstances, the demands have become final and the petitioner has accepted the demands. Respondents also pleaded that the delay is a ground to refuse an appropriate relief so as to avoid unsettling the settled things. Relying upon the decisions in State of Maharashtra v. Digambar (AIR 1995 SC 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in to the Act, it was held that the amendment would take effect only from 1st June, 2015 and is thus prospective in nature. The aforesaid judgment has become final and is binding upon the authorities. Thus the jurisdiction to levy late fee under section 234E arises only from 01-06.2015 and not earlier. 8. As regards the contention on the delay, though the said contention was impressive on firs....