TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 1141
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....Ramaswamy Senior Standing counsel COMMON ORDER These writ petition have been filed challenging the impugned orders dated 24.09.2021 in DIN.Nos.ITBA/COM/S/91/2021- 22/1035865330(1) and ITBA/COM/S/91/2021-22/1035864785(1) passed by the first respondent and to direct the third respondent to delete the levy of fee under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred as "the Act") for the period upto 01.06.2015. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Section 200A of the Act deals with the manner in which the statement of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) shall be processed. Accordingly, the petitioner had filed the statement of TDS for the assessment years 2012-2013, 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and for the first quar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Department had imposed the late fee under Section 234E of the Act when the petitioner had processed the statement of TDS under Section 200A of the Act. 5. Further, he would submit that the petitioner had filed the reply dated 16.04.2019 for all the intimations sent under Section 200A of the Act by the respondents and the said reply was considered as a waiver application and the impugned order was passed by the respondent rejecting the request of the petitioner to remove the late fee, which was imposed under Section 234E of the Act while processing the TDS under Section 200A of the Act, for the assessment years 2012-2013 to 2014- 2015, without considering the submissions of the petitioner. Hence, the present writ petitions. 6. On the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er Section 234E of the Act even if the provision under Section 200A(1)(c) of the Act is not available and he referred to some citations with regard to the upholding provisions of Section 234E of the Act, which are as follows: (i) Qatalys Software Technologies Private Limited vs. Union of India reported in [2020] 115 taxxmann.com 345 (Madras); (ii) Biswajit Das vs. Union of India reported in [2019] 103 taxmann.com 290 (Delhi); (iii) Dr.Amrit Lal Mangal vs. Union of India reported in [2015] 62 taxmann.com 310 (Punjab); (iv) Rajesh Kourani vs. Union of India reported in [2017] 83 taxmann.com 137 (Gujarat); 9. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents and also perused the materials a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to file a quarterly Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) statement containing the details of deduction of tax made during the quarter by the prescribed due date. Similarly, under Chapter XVII-BB of the Act, a person is required to collect tax on certain specified receipts at the specified rates. The person collecting tax ('the collector') also is required to file a quarterly Tax Collection at Source (TCS) statement containing the details of collection of tax made during the quarter by the prescribed due date. In order to provide effective deterrence against delay in furnishing of TDS/TCS statement, the Finance Act, 2012 inserted section 234E in the Act to provide for levy of fee for late furnishing of TDS/TCS statement. The levy of fee under secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ble for processing of TDS statement. As the mechanism of TCS statement is similar to TDS statement, it is proposed to insert a provision in the Act for processing of TCS statements on the line of existing provisions for processing of TDS statement contained in section 200A of the Act. The proposed provision shall also incorporate the mechanism for computation of fee payable under section 234E of the Act." 13. A reading of the above makes it clear that since no mechanism was available for determination of late fee payable under Section 234E of the Act at the time of processing TDS statements. Thus it was proposed to amend the provisions of Section 200A of the Act, so as to enable the computation of fee payable under Section 234E of the Ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing Section 200A(1)(c) of the Act retrospectively. This Court is not in agreement with the said submissions of the respondent. Since, there was no provision for imposing the late fee under Section 234E of the Act while filing and processing the TDS returns under Section 200A of the Act, clause (c) to Sub-Section (1) to Section 200A was introduced with effect from 01.07.2012. Therefore, the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent is rejected by this Court. 16. Further it was stated by the respondent that they have no power to waive the late fee and only the Commissioner of Income Tax is empowered to pass the revised order by proper application of provision of Section 264C of the Act. 17. In view of the above....