TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1630
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessment Years are 2014-15 & 2015-16. 2. Common issue is raised in these appeals and hence, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. Identical grounds are raised in these appeals. The grounds raised read as follows:- "1. The order of the Learned CIT(A) is contrary to law, facts, and circumstances of the case and is liable to be set aside. 2. The order of the Learned CIT(A) suffers from legal infirmity as the Learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the rectification order passed u/s 154 of the Act is without jurisdiction, since a rectification u/s 154 of the Act cannot exist independently of an original assessment order. 3. The Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the action ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntion that levy of fee under section 234E prior to 01.06.2015 is not legally tenable. 9. The Learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that levy of fee under section 234E for a period prior to 01.06.2015 amounts to retrospective application of law, which is impermissible in the interpretation of fiscal matters unless expressly stated by the legislature. 10. The Learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the levy of interest under section 220(2), which being consequential to an invalid demand under section 234E, is equally unsustainable. 11. The Learned CIT(A) erred both on facts and in law in holding that the time limit for filing the rectification / correction statement had expired. The finding of the Learned CIT(A) is co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e fees u/s. 234E of the Act. Subsequently, assessee filed rectified TDS statements. The CPC passed rectification order u/s. 154 r.w.s.200A of the Act raising the same late fee u/s. 234E of the Act levied in the original order passed u/s. 200A of the Act. The details of the quarterly statement filed, the orders passed u/s. 200A of the Act, orders u/s. 154 of the Act, late fee levied u/s. 234E of the Act are as follows:- AY Quarter Ending Date of filing of TDS statement Order u/s 200A dated Order u/s. 154 rws 200A dated 234E levied 2014-15 Q1 15.05.2014 30.05.2014 28.03.2025 60800 Q2 15.05.2014 30.05.2014 28.03.2025 42400 Q3 15.04.2014 30.05.2014 28..03.2025 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elied on the orders of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The provision governing the correction of TDS statement did not prescribe any specific time limit for filing such corrections prior to the period 01.04.2025. The assessee had given corrected TDS statement on 26.03.2025. Therefore, the assessee had acted within the framework of law during the relevant assessment year. The amendment brought about by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 with respect to time limit to file correction statements cannot be given retrospective effect. Therefore, the conclusion of CIT(A) that assessee's rectification / correction statements are timely barred is legally untenable. The CIT(A) has erred in dismissed the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vides for levy of fee for delay in filing TDS statements, the mechanism for computation of such fee while processing the statements under section 200A of the Act was not available prior to 01.06.2015. The enabling provision in section 200A(1)(c) permitting such computation was inserted only with effect from 01.06.2015. Therefore, in respect of TDS statements relating to the period prior to 01.06.2015, levy of late fee under section 234E of the Act through an intimation under section 200A of the Act is not sustainable. This view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of True Blue Voice India Pvt. Ltd. (supra), wherein it has been held that late fee u/s. 234E of the Act cannot be levied while processing the ....