TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 922
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Tax Officer (TDS), Udaipur. 2. The assessee has filed an application under section 154 of the Act against the order under section 200A. Assessee requested the ITO to rectify the levy of fee charged under section 234E of the Act. The ld. ITO rejected the application on the ground that it is not a mistake apparent from record as it is a debatable issue. The relevant paragraph of the order is reproduced here as under:- "3. On-going through the record it is noticed that it is not a mistake apparent on record and issue is debatable and also not covered u/s 154 of the Act. Thus the contention of the deductor/assessee is not tenable because the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Rajasthan High court Jaipur has dismissed the appeals in the cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....T(A) had not given proper opportunity to the assessee. However, on perusal of the ld. CIT(Appeal's) order, it is observed that ld. CIT(A) had issued following notices electronically to the assessee. Sl. No. Date of Notice/letter u/s. 250 of the Act Date of hearing Remarks 1. 31.12.2020 06.01.2021 No Response 2. 09.07.2021 19.07.2021 No Response 3. 26.11.2021 13.12.2021 No Response 4. 07.01.2022 28.01.2022 No Response 5. 23.02.2022 09.03.2022 No Response 6.1 Thus, ld. CIT(A) had issued five notices and assessee failed to submit reply to the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we are of the opinion that sufficient opportunity had been given by the ld. CIT(A) to the assessee hence, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 200A of the Act for collection of fee, the department could not have charged such fee. xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx 18. In this context, we may notice that section 200A which pertains to processing of statements of tax deducted at source provides for the procedure once a statement of deduction of tax at source is filed by the person responsible to do so and authorizes the Assessing Officer to make certain adjustments which are prima-facie or arithmetical in nature. The officer would then send an intimation of a statement to the assessee. Prior to 01.06.2015, this provision did not include any reference to the fee payable under section 234E of the Act. By recasting sub-section (1), the new clause-c permit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in absence of section 200A of the Act with introduction of section 234E, it was always open for the Revenue to demand and collect the fee for late filing of the statements. Section 200A would merely regulate the manner in which the computation of such fee would be made and demand raised. In other words, we cannot subscribe to the view that without a regulatory provision being found for section 200A for computation of fee, the fee prescribed under section 234E cannot be levied. Any such view would amount to a charging section yielding to the machinery provision. If at all, the recasted clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 200A would be in nature of clarificatory amendment. Even in absence of such provision, as noted, it was always open ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h are independent levies. Section 271H only provides that such penalty would not be levy if certain conditions are fulfilled. One of the conditions is that the tax with fee and interest is paid. The additional condition being that the statement is filed latest within one year from the due date. 21. Counsel for the petitioner however, referred to the decision of Supreme Court in case of CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 128 ITR 294/5 Taxman 1 (SC), to contend that when a machinery provision is not provided, the levy itself would fail. The decision of Supreme Court in case of B C Srinivasa Setty (supra) was rendered in entirely different background. Issue involved was of charging capital gain on transfer of a capital asset. In case ....