T M INPUTS AND SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (TDS), TDS, WARD-2(3), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 456/HYD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 May 2021AY 2015-163 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal followed the view that Section 200A, inserted with effect from June 1, 2015, should be treated as prospective. Therefore, the late fee levied under this section was directed to be deleted.

What were the facts?

The appeals were filed by three assessees against orders levying late fee under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act. The issue revolved around whether Section 200A, which allows for the levy of such fees, had retrospective effect.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the retrospective applicability of Section 200A of the Income Tax Act for levying late fees under Section 234E.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 200A,Section 234E

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI S.S. GODARA & SHRI L.P. SAHU

O R D E R PER S.S. GODARA, JM : These three assessees’ appeals are directed against different orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Hyderabad, involving varying assessment years stated as under.

Sl. Authority’s Proceedings order u/s dated/Case No. 01 454/H/19 to 456/H/19 2013-14 to CIT(A)-8,Hyd 200A to 2015-16 Order dated 03 03.10.2018 Case no.10054 to 10056/2017- 18 04 436/Hyd/19 2013-14 -do-, dt 02.10.18 200A in case no.10053/2017- 18 05 458 to 460/H/19 2013-14 -do-, in case 200A to to no.0160/2018- 07 2015-16 19

2.

We notice during the course of hearing that the assessees’ sole identical substantive ground seeks to reverse both the lower authorities’ action levying sec. 234E late fee inserted in the Act w.e.f. 01.06.2015 carrying retrospective effect. We find in this backdrop that case law Fateh Raj Singh & Others vs. UOI (2016) 289 CTR 602 (Kar.) holds sec.200A inserted in the Act wef 1.6.2015 as prospective only and Rajesh Kaurani vs. UOI (2017) 83 taxmann.com 137 (Guj.) has taken a contrary view. No guidance has come from hon’ble jurisdictional high court qua the instant issue. We thus adopt the legal proposition favouring the assessee and direct the assessing authority(ies) concerned to delete the impugned late filing levy. These assessees’ appeals are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Pronounced in Open Court on 10th May, 2021. Sd/- Sd/- ( L.P. SAHU) ( S.S. GODARA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 10th May, 2021. 2 *gmv.

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

More judgments on Section 200A

All 4,379 judgments and leading authorities on Section 200A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →