Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA
PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM:
The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-8, Ahmedabad (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 10.01.2018 concerning A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15.
Briefly stated, the assessee inter alia filed return of TDS 02.06.2016 for various quarters concerning F.Y. 2012-13 & 2013-14 respectively. The AO computed late filing fee of Rs. 91,446/- in
ITA Nos.476 & 477/Ahd/2018 [Mahamantra Textile vs. CIT TDS] A.Ys. 2013-14 &2014-15 - 2 -
aggregate for late filing of TDS return with the aid of S-234E of the Act r.w.s. S-200A of the Act. In the captioned appeal, the assessee seeks to challenge the imposition of late filing fees imposed under s. 234E of the Act for default in furnishing statements contemplated under s. 200A r.w.r. 31A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962.
None appeared for assessee when the matter was called for hearing the matter is accordingly proceeded ex parte.
From the case records, it appears that the case of the assessee that section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “the Act”) is a machinery provision providing mechanism for processing a statement of deduction of tax at source and for making adjustments which are arithmetical or prima facie in nature and does not create any charge in any manner. This provision specifically provides for computing fee payable under s. 234E w.e.f. 01.06.2015. From the records, it is the case of the assessee that section 234E being a charging provision creating a charge for levying fee for certain defaults in filing statements and fees prescribed under s. 234E cannot be levied without a regulatory provision found in section 200A for computation of fee prior to 01.06.2015.
We find that the legal issue raised by the Assessee has been addressed by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee in the case of Rajesh Kourani vs. Union of India (2017) 83 Taxmann.com 137 (Guj.). The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that section 234E of the Act is a charging provision creating a charge for levying fee for certain defaults in filing statements and fee prescribed under s.234E could be levied even in the absence of a regulatory provision being found in section 200A for computation of fee. In the light of aforesaid decision of the
ITA Nos.476 & 477/Ahd/2018 [Mahamantra Textile vs. CIT TDS] A.Ys. 2013-14 &2014-15 - 3 -
Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, we decline to interfere with the action of the Revenue authorities.
In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed.
This Order pronounced in Open Court on 31/07/2019
Sd/- Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 31/07/2019 TANMAY TRUE COPY आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. राज�व / Revenue 2. आवेदक / Assessee 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,
उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद ।
1.Date of dictation on 30.07.2019 2.Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 30.07.2019 3.Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. 30.07.2019 4.Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 30.07.2019 5.Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. P.S./P.S 31.07.2019 6.Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 31.07.2019 7.Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………. 8.The date on which the file goes to the Asstt. Registrar for signature on the order…………………… 9.Date of Despatch of the Order………