TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (2) TMI 578
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Act, for alleged default in furnishing TDS statements, which is unjustified and untenable in law and thus, should be deleted as such. 2. That the learned CIT(Appeals) has further failed to appreciate the fact that provisions of section 234E has come into statue w e f 01.06.2015 and the same is not applicable for the impugned assessment years and as such, reliance so placed on the same is misplaced in law. 3. That the learned CIT(Appeals) has ignored the various judgments/ orders filed by the assessee - appellant wherein it has been held that provisions of section 234E has prospective operation and cannot be made applicable for the impugned assessment year. 4. That the learned CIT(Appeals) has further erred in stating that "....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4. Before us, Ld. Counsel Shri Rakesh Gupta at the outset submitted that it was brought to the notice of the department that, assessee has paid the tax from her own pocket even though the assessee's contention has been that payment has been made separately to each of the vendors which was below the threshold limit of Rs. 50 lacs, therefore, she was not required to deduct TDS u/s 194IA. From No. 26QB and challan of tax deposited were generated on 5.4.2014 from the electronic system which is evident from the orders passed, which clearly mentions the date of filing of challan cum statement as "5.4.2014". Thus, levy of fee u/s 234E is not applicable at all, because there is no delay in filing of the said statement as the same was filed along ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons (P) Ltd. 68 ITD 390 (Mumbai). The object of introducing section 234E to curb a situation where tax was used to be deducted but statement would not be uploaded by the assessees and such inaction on the part of the assessee would deprive the department to give credit to the person in whose account tax was deducted. In the instant case, tax was paid on 5.4.2014 and statement was filed on 5.4.2014, there could not have been any inconvenience to the department in giving credit to the person concerned. Thus, object behind the levy of fee u/s 234E stood achieved in the present case and for this reason also, there was no reason fee u/s 234E should be levied. 5. On the other hand, Ld. DR submitted that once assessee has not deducted the TDS a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Central Government within the prescribed time, prepare such statement for such period as may be prescribed. Provision of section 200A provides that where the statement of tax deduction at source has been made by the person deducting any sum u/s 200, then such statement shall be processed in the manner given therein. Clause (c) of section 200A has been substituted by the Finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 1.6.2015 which reads as under:- "(c) the fee, if any, shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of section 234E;" 6.1 Fee for default u/s 234E provides that, when a person fails to deliver or cause to be delivered a statement within the time prescribed u/s 200(3), then that person shall be liable to pay fee in the manner provided there....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unsel for the appellants. The first contention for assailing the legality and validity of the intimation under Section 200A was that, the provision of Section 200A(1)(c), (d) and (f) have come into force only with effect from 1.6.2015 and hence, there was no authority or competence or jurisdiction on the part of the concerned Officer or the Department to compute and determine the fee under Section 234E in respect of the assessment year of the earlier period and the return filed for the said respective assessment years namely all assessment years and the returns prior to 1.6.2015. It was submitted that, when no express authority was conferred by the statute under Section 200A prior to 1.6.2015 for computation of any fee under Section 234E no....