TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 118
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....014 along with interest u/sec.201(1) of the Act for late payment of tax deducted at source. The assessee challenged the late fee computed by the Assessing Officer u/sec.234E before the learned CIT(A) and argued that the provisions of sec.200A has been amended 01.06.2015 and prior to amendment of section there is no enabling provision for computing interest and therefore, the Assessing Officer cannot charge late filing fee u/sec.234E of the Act for the period prior to 01.06.2015. The learned CIT(A) after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee, rejected the arguments of the assessee on the ground that the provisions of sec.234E mandates payment of Rs. 200/- per day for delay in filing quarterly TDS returns and since the assessee has not filed quarterly returns within the due date, the Assessing Officer has rightly computed the late fee u/sec.234E of the Act. The learned CIT(A) had also rejected the ground taken by the assessee challenging the levy of interest u/sec.201(1A) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the Order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is now, in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Sri GVN Hari, Advocate-Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that this is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Tribunal dated 15/12/2022 (supra) are extracted herein under: "8. We have heard both the sides, perused the material available on record as well as the orders of the Ld. Revenue Authorities. The main question that arises in this appeal is whether TDS returns pertaining to the period prior to 01/06/2015, if filed after 01/06/2015 and processed after 01/06/2015 whether they attract the amended provisions of Finance Act, 2012 and the specific provision for levy of "fee" under section 234E of the Act which was inserted w.e.f 1/6/2015. In the present case the due date for filing its TDS statement for the Q1 of FY 2014-15 in Form No. 26Q is 30/06/2014 which falls within the specified date of 1/6/2015 ie., insertion of the new provisions but the assessee filed its TDS returns on 27/11/2015 ie., beyond the due date for filing the TDS returns. The Ld. AO treating this filing / furnishing of TDS statement as a default since it is not filed within the stipulated time as per the TDS provisions and imposed late fees u/s. 234E amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/- and passed order u/s. 200A of the Act dated 01/12/2015. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to bel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e authority would also be a aspect which may be required to be considered before such provisions is held to be retroactive in nature. Further, when any provision is inserted for liability to pay any tax or the fee by way of compensatory in nature or fee independently simultaneously mode and the manner of its enforceability is also required to be considered and examined. Not only that, but, if the mode and the manner is not expressly prescribed, the provisions may also be vulnerable. All such aspects will be required to be considered before one considers regulatory mechanism or provision for regulating the mode and the manner of recovery and its enforceability as retroactive. If at the time when the fee was provided under Section 234E, the Parliament also provided for its utility for giving privilege under Section 271H(3) that too by expressly put bar for penalty under Section 272A by insertion of proviso to Section 272A(2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A payable under Section 234E. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Now, coming to the facts of the instant case before me, the assessee had deducted tax at source u/s. 195 of the Act but belatedly filed the returns on 27/11/2015 under the bonafide intention that the amended provisions will not attract for levy of late fee u/s. 234E of the Act since the due date for filing the returns for Q1 of FY 2014-15 is 30/06/2014. Since the period under consideration is the 1st Quarter of FY 2014-15 ie., prior to the amendment to section 200A(1) of the Act wherein clause (c) was inserted w.e.f 01/06/2015 and the assessee had already deposited the tax at source prior to the amendment to section 200A(1), the levy of late fee u/s. 234E for default in furnishing the statement beyond the stipulated time is not sustainable in law. Further, respectfully following the ratio laid down in the judgment deliverd by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi (supra); judgment of the Kerala High Court in the case of United Metals (supra) and various decisions of the Tribunal (supra), I am of the view that the levying of late fee under section 234E for the period prior to 1/6/2015 is not sustainable in law. 14. Thus, in the instant case since....