2022 (7) TMI 1397

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Grounds of Appeal 1. The Order of the ld Assessing Officer is contrary to the law and the facts 2. The ld AO erred in law by levying late filing fee U/s. 234E Rs.46,569/- by order dt 12.03.2014, when there was no authority to levy late filing fee prior to 01.06.2015. 3. The ld CIT(A) ought to have noted that the appellant filed rectification petition for deletion of late filing fee levied U/s. 234E of the Act in the original intimation order passed prior to 01.06.2015, while there was no authority to levy such late fee. 4. The appellant states the above contention is squarely covered by the decisions of the Tribunals and High Courts that levy of late filing fee U/s.234E prior to 01.06.2015 is bad in law.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....34E prior to amendment of law on 01.06.2015. Therefore. the demand of late lee would be automatically cancelled as the law prevailing at that time U/s. 200A did not allow such levy while processing the TDS Returns b. Olari Little Flower Kuries Pvt Ltd Vs. Union of India & Ors. (2022) reported in 440 ITR 26 (Ker) Held. dismissing the appeal. that the intimations dealing with filing of belated statements prior to June 1.2015 were liable to be set aside. Section 234E of the Income-tax Act. 1961 is intra vires the Constitution of India. c. Jiji Varghese Vs. ITO (IDS) & Others (2022) reported in 443 ITR 267 (Ker) Held, allowing the petition, (i) that the jurisdiction to levy late fee under section 234E arose o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2012-13 and 2013-14 under consideration in the year 2020. The correction statements have been finalized u/s.154 r.w.s. 200A by CPC-TDS for both appeals under consideration on 23.10.2020 and 02.11.2020. In both cases, the orders u/s. 154 r.w.s. 200A were passed after 01.06.2015. 4. On the basis of the above finding given by ld.CIT(A), ld.DR had submitted decision relied upon by the assessee are distinguishable, as rectification order u/s. 154 r.w.s. 200A was passed by the CPC, TDS on 05.10.2021. 5. Per contra, the ld. AR had drawn our attention to paragraph 3 at Page 21 of the order passed by the Bangalore Tribunal, wherein the identical facts, the Tribunal has set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A). "3. The Brief facts ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent from record, and also the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Sri Fatheraj Singh & Others Vs. UOI (supra) is applicable prospectively and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT (Appeals), the assessee has filed an appeal with the Tribunal." 6. Similar issue to the fact, the other decision passed by the Tribunal in the said decision in paragraph 11 & 12. It was held as under: "11. Upon careful consideration we find that higher court including that from Hon'ble Karnataka High Court have held that prior to amendment w.e.f. 1.6.2015 interest under section 234E could not be levied. It is undisputed that period of TDS return is prior to the amendment. At that time there was no enabl....