Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”: HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY & SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
O R D E R PER S.S. GODARA, J.M.: The instant batch of seven appeals pertaining to a single assessee M/s New Age Real Properties LLB, Hyderabad involves the following relevant particulars: Sl. ITA No. & CIT(A) Order, date & Proceedings u/s No. Assessment Case No. Year 1 610/Hyd/2020 17830, U/s 200A of the 2016-17 17831 & 17832/CIT(A)- Income-tax Act. 8/Hyd/2019-20, dated 21/08/2020. 2 611/Hyd/2020 -do- -do-
:- 2 -: to 616/Hyd/2020 New Age Real Properties LLP, Hyd
2016-17 3 612/Hyd/2020 -do- -do- 2016-17 4 613/Hyd/2020 -do- -do- 2016-17 5 614/Hyd/2020 17834 & -do- 2016-17 17835/CIT(A)-8/Hyd / 2019-20, dated 21/08/2020. 6 615/Hyd/2020 -do- -do- 2016-17 7 616/Hyd/2020 -do- -do- 2016-17 Heard both the parties. Case files perused.
We notice at the outset that assessee’s instant appeals suffer from 17 days delay in filing before the ITAT. Considering the submissions of the ld. AR that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause for not filing these appeals within the stipulated time, we rely on Case law Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors, 1987 AIR 1353 (SC) and University of Delhi Vs. Union of India, Civil Appeal No. 9488 & 9489/2019 dated 17 December, 2019, hold that such a delay; supported by cogent reasons, deserves to be condoned so as to make way for the cause of substantial justice. We accordingly hold that assessee’s impugned delay in filing these appeals is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to the circumstances beyond its control. The same stands condoned. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits.
:- 3 -: to 616/Hyd/2020 New Age Real Properties LLP, Hyd
It emerges, at the outset, with the able assistance of both the learned representatives that the assessee’s sole substantive grievance canvassed herein seeks to reverse both the lower authorities’ action levying fees u/s 234E of the Act. We find that the instant issue before us is no more res-integra in the light of this Tribunal’s recent coordinate bench decision in the case of M/s Terra Infra Development Ltd., Hyderabad in & 1875/Hyd/2017 for AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15, order dated 03/10/2018, holding as under:
“4. We find that though the provisions for levy of fee in certain cases has been brought into the Statute book w.e.f. 1.7.2012, it has been brought under the purview of section 200A only w.e.f. 1.6.2015. Therefore, as rightly held by the Coordinate Bench in the case of M/s. Sonalac Paintings & Coatings Ltd (cited Supra) we hold that the interest u/s 234E cannot be levied in respect of TDS returns filed prior to 1.6.2015. For the sake of ready reference, the relevant para is reproduced hereunder: "10. Now coming to the merits of the case, we find force in the argument of the learned Counsel for the assessee that prior to 01.06.2015, there was no mandate, as per the Statute, to make any adjustment on account of levy of fees u/s 234E while processing TDS returns u/s 200A. We have taken note of the order of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court holding the amendment made to section 200A w.e.f. 01.06.2015, giving power to make adjustment on account of fees u/s 234E while processing returns u/s 200A to be retrospective in nature, stating that this power
:- 4 -: to 616/Hyd/2020 New Age Real Properties LLP, Hyd given to the AO is a machinery provision while the substantive provision of the power to levy fees u/s 234E was always there on the Statute from 01.06.2012. But at the same time, we note that the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court held that levy of fees u/s 234E while processing returns, TDS u/s 200A prior to 01.06.2015 was without any authority of law. With two divergent view of the Hon'ble High Courts on the issue and in the absence of any decision by the jurisdictional High Court, we concur with the learned Counsel for the assessee that as per the well accepted rule of construction, if two reasonable constructions of a statute are possible the construction which favours the assessee must be adopted. In view of the same, respectfully following the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi (Supra), we hold that the fees levied in all the present cases u/s 234E prior to 01.06.2015 in the intimations made u/s 200A was without authority of law and the same is therefore, directed to be deleted. In view of the above, all the appeals of the assessee stand allowed".
5. Respectfully following the same, assessee's appeals for both the AYs are allowed.”
We adopt the above detailed discussion mutatis- mutandis to direct the Assessing Officer to delete the impugned levy(ies) involving TDS returns filed/to be filed prior to 01/06/2015 and at the same time, confirm his action pertaining to the time period, post-facto, the said cut-off date. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.
No other ground has been pressed before us.
:- 5 -: to 616/Hyd/2020 New Age Real Properties LLP, Hyd
These assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.