SIPL TEXTILES P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-77(1), NEW DELHI

ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY: JUDICIAL MEMBER: This is an appeal by assessee against order dated 27.04.2018 of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals)-35, New Delhi.

Though, in a common order, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has disposed of appeals for assessment years 2013-14 to 2016-17, however, presently we are concerned with assessment year 2016- 17.

Considering the nature of dispute and prevailing legal position 3. on the issue, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee after hearing the learned Departmental Representative and based on material available on record.

Assessee challenged the levy of fee under Section 234E of the Act by filing appeals before learned Commissioner (Appeals). Relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in case of Rajesh Rajiv Kourani Vs. Union of India ( 83 Taxmann.com 137 ), learned Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the levy of fee under Section 234E of the Act, even, for the period prior to 01.06.2015, the date on which amendment to Section 200A was made enabling the assessing officer to levy fee under Section 234E of the Act. Be that as it may, in the present appeal, we are concerned with levy of fee for the financial year 2015-16. Therefore, even accepting that the amendment made to Section 200A is prospective, still, levy of fee under Section 234E of the Act is possible as the period involved is post-amendment to Section 200A of the Act. Now, it is fairly well settled that levy of fee under Section 234E of the Act is not of penal nature. This is a fee levied on the assessee for availing the facility of filing the TDS statement with delay. Further, it is fairly well settled that it is mandatory upon the assessing officer to levy fee under Section 234E of the Act while processing the TDS statements under Section 200A of the Act after the amendment to the provisions from Ist June 2015.