TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 2137
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax Act, 1961 is amended w.e.f. 01.06.2015 to provide for charging of late fee u/s 234E. Also, as per the well-established principles of interpretation of statute, the provision shall have prospective effect unless it is expressly provided or impliedly demonstrated. Thus, it was held that the charging of late fee u/s 234E in the intimation passed u/s 200A is illegal and invalid. (Thus, The decision is in the favor of appellant) e) Hon'ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Rajesh Kourani 83 taxmann.com 137 Wherein it was held that section 200A is a machinery provision and fee under section 234E can be levied even without a regulatory provision being found in section 200A for computation of fee. The Hon'ble High court held that the machinery provision in section 200A cannot override a charging provision in section 234E. (The decision is in favor of Revenue) f) Hon'ble High court of Madras in the case of Conceria International (P.) Ltd. reported in [2023] 157 taxmann.com 335 (Madras)/[2024] 464 ITR 92 (Mad). Wherein the above two contradictory decisions were considered and it was held that section 234E is the substantive provision and late filing fee could ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y TDS payable or refundable etc before 01/06/2015. Hence late fees for TDS quarterly statement cannot be recovered by way of processing under section sec 200A. Therefore, demand notice cannot be issued under this section, but if issued, then it is illegal. Hence liable to be cancelled. 4. Section 200A has been amended w.e.f. 01/06/2015 to pass order u/s.200A for the purpose of levying late fees U/S.234E for TDS statements which were due to be filed on or after 1-6-2015 &for TDS deducted on or after 1-6-2015 & thus it is clear that orders levying late fee u/s 234E passed for TDS statement which were due to be filed before 1-6-2015 & for TDS deducted before 01/06/2015 are wrong, unlawful and beyond jurisdiction hence liable to be quashed and late fee should be deleted in view of various High Court and tribunal judgments of coordinate benches also. 5. That the TDS statement has been processed u/s 200A by TDS-CPC, whereas as per sec 200A (2), CBDT has not and cannot authorize TDS-CPC to levy late fee. Therefore, levy of late fee is beyond jurisdiction. 6. That the interest has been charged on the amount of 234E, whereas late fee is not an amount of tax. There....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ame into effect from 1st June 2015. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai, in S.S.S. Construction (supra) has considered this issue by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Fatehraj Singhvi v/s Union of India, [2016] 289 CTR 602 (Kar.) and also considered the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court in Olari Little Flower Kuries Pvt. Ltd. v/s Union of India, [2022] 134 taxmann.com 111 (Ker.) holding that the intimation issued by the Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act to levy late fee for belated returned filed for the period prior to 1st June 2015 is invalid. Relevant portion, vide Para-4 of the order dated 22/04/2022 (supra), is extracted below:- "4. None appeared for the assessee. We have heard learned DR and perused orders of the authorities below. We find that the learned CIT(A) has disposed off appeals filed by the assessee on technical grounds without condoning delay in filing appeals, although, the assessee has filed petition for ITA No. 3495 to 3504/Chny/2019 condonation of delay. We find that the issue involved in the present appeals filed by the assessee is on levy of late fee u/s.234E of the Act, for belated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... issue and rejected the arguments taken by the assessee and confirmed late fee levied under section 234E of the Income Tax Act, as per mandate of the statute. In the meantime, the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi v. Union of India [2016] 289 CTR 602 (Karnataka) had considered the issue and after analyzing the provisions of section 234E of the Act and section 200A of the Act and held that in the absence of enabling provision in section 200A of the Act, the Assessing Officer cannot levy late fee under section 234E of the Act, while processing the quarterly TDS return filed for the period of the respective assessment years prior to 01.06.2015. A similar view has been expressed by the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2022] 134 taxmann.com 111 (Kerala) after considering the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi v. Union of India [2016] 289 CTR 602 (Karnataka) and held that the provisions of section 200A of the Act were mandated to enable computation of late fee payable under section 234E of the Act, at the time of processing of quarterly TDS return a....