Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Camp Bench at Jalandhar
Before: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Ravish Sood
P a g e | 1 ITA Nos. 126 to 133/ASR/2017 A.Y. 2015-16 M/s GNA Udyog Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Camp Bench at Jalandhar Before Shri N.K. Saini, Vice President and Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member ITA Nos.126 to 133/Asr./2017 (Assessment Year: 2015-16)
M/s GNA Udyog Ltd. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax 1-C Chhoti Baradari, Centralized processing Cell TDS Vs. Garha Road, Ghaziabad (U.P) Jalandhar.
PAN – AAACG4912C (Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by: Shri Gunjeet Syal, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Ankit Kumar Aggrawal, D.R Date of Hearing: 11.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 15.01.2019
O R D E R PER BENCH: The present appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the consolidated order passed by the CIT(A)-2, Jalandhar, dated 27.10.2015, which in turn arises from the respective intimations issued under Sec.200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘I.T. Act’) for A.Y 2015-16. As the assessee in the aforementioned appeals had assailed the levy of fees charged under Sec. 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘I.T Act’), therefore, the same are being taken up and disposed off together by way of a common order.
Briefly stated, as the assessee company had delayed the filing of the statements of tax deduction at source for all the 4 quarters pertaining to A.Y
P a g e | 2 ITA Nos. 126 to 133/ASR/2017 A.Y. 2015-16 M/s GNA Udyog Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax 2015-16, thus interest under Sec.234E I.T. Act was charged upon it, as under :
Particulars Fee u/s. 234E Date of filing of Date of Intimation TDS Return u/s 200A 1st Quarter: 26Q Rs.26,430/- 22.09.2015 26.09.2015 :27EQ Rs.9,500/- 22.09.2015 26.09.2015 2nd Quarter : 26Q Rs.68,400/- 22.09.2015 26.09.2015 :27EQ Rs.33,980/- 22.09.2015 26.09.2015 3rd Quarter : 26Q Rs.50,000/- 22.09.2015 26.09.2015 :27EQ Rs.15,110/- 22.09.2015 26.09.2015 4th Quarter :26Q Rs.27,670/- 22.09.2015 04.10.2015 :27EQ Rs.26,000/- 22.09.2015 26.09.2015
Aggrieved, the assessee assailed the fees levied under Sec.234E vide the respective intimations under Sec.200A of the I.T. Act before the CIT(A). It was the contention of the assessee that as per Sec. 200A as was available on the statute prior to 01.06.2015, there was no enabling provision which at the relevant point of time provided for raising of demand towards levy of fees under Sec. 234E, thus the raising of demand under the said statutory provision in the case of the assessee for the year under consideration was beyond the scope of permissible adjustments contemplated under Sec.200A of the I.T Act. However, the CIT(A) after deliberating on the contentions advanced by the assessee was not persuaded to subscribe to the same. It was observed by the CIT(A) that as in the case of the assessee before him the respective TDS returns were filed on 22.09.2015 and the same had thereafter been processed on 26.09.2015 and 04.10.2015, i.e. much subsequent to 01.06.2015 i.e. the date on which the provision enabling the levy of fees under Sec.234E was incorporated in Sec.200A of the I.T. Act, hence the said levy was well in order. On the basis of his aforesaid deliberations the CIT(A) concluded that the ACIT, CPC was justified in levying fees towards late filing of the TDS returns in the hands of the assessee.
The assessee being aggrieved with the order CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal before us. The ld. Authorized Representative (for short
P a g e | 3 ITA Nos. 126 to 133/ASR/2017 A.Y. 2015-16 M/s GNA Udyog Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax ‘A.R’) for the assessee at the very outset of the hearing of the appeals submitted that as the section enabling the levy of fees under Sec.234E was made available in Sec.200A with effect from 01.06.2015, hence the ACIT, CPC, Ghaziabad had erred in levying fees under the said statutory provisions in the hands of the assessee for A.Y. 2015-16. The ld. A.R submitted that the issue involved in the present appeal was squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors. Vs.Union of India & Ors. (2016) 142 DTR 281 (Kar) and the order of the ITAT, Chandigarh in the case of Sonalac Paints & Coatings Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2018) 167 DTR 83 (Chd.) (Copies placed on record). In the aforesaid judicial pronouncements it was observed that in the course of processing of statement tax deducted at source under Sec.234A no fees under Sec.234E could be charged for the period prior to 01.06.2015.
Per contra, the ld. Departmental Representative (for short ‘D.R’) relied on the order of the CIT(A) and submitted that as the assessee had delayed the filing of the respective statements of tax deduction at source for all the four quarters in Forms 26Q/27EQ, therefore, the ACIT, CPC had rightly levied fees under Sec.234E in its hands.
We have heard the authorised representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record. Admittedly, it is a matter of fact borne from the records that the assessee had delayed filing of the statements of tax deduction at source in Forms 26Q/27EQ for all the four quarters relevant to assessment year 2015-16. On a perusal of the records, it stands revealed that all of the statements of tax deduction at source were filed by the assessee on 22.09.2015 and the same had thereafter been processed under Sec.200A of the I.T Act on 26.09.2015 and 04.10.2015, as per the details tabulated hereinabove, We find that the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi & Ors. Vs. Union of India (2016) 289 CTR 602 (Kar.) had concluded that the notice under Sec.200A of the I.T. Act computing fee under Sec.234E, to the extent the same related to the period of the tax
P a g e | 4 ITA Nos. 126 to 133/ASR/2017 A.Y. 2015-16 M/s GNA Udyog Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax deducted prior to 01.06.2015 was liable to be set aside. The aforesaid judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka had thereafter been relied upon by the ITAT, Chandigarh in the case of Sonalac Paints & Coatings Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2018) 167 DTR 83 (Chd.). In the aforesaid case it was observed by the Tribunal that levy of fees under Sec.234E while processing the TDS returns under Sec.200A prior to 01.06.2016 was without any authority of law. On the basis of its aforesaid observations, the Tribunal had concluded that the fees levied under Sec.234E prior to 01.06.2015 in the intimations made under Sec. 200A was without authority of law, and as such the fees therein levied was liable to be deleted. Apart therefrom, we find that the issue involved in the appeal before us is also covered by an order of the ITAT, Amritsar in the case of Tata Rice Mills Vs. ACIT (CPC), TDS Ghaziabad (ITA No. 395/ASR/2016; dated 25.10.2017. In the aforementioned case, it was observed by the Tribunal that the assessee had filed its statement of tax deduction at source for the ‘second quarter’ relevant to Financial year 2014- 15 on 19th June, 2015, which was thereafter processed on 23.06.2015 by the ACIT-TDS, CPC and a late fee under Sec. 234E of Rs. 49,400/- was charged in the intimation issued under Sec. 200A of the I.T. Act. It was observed by the Tribunal that as the amendment made under Sec.200A was effective from 01.06.2015 and applicable prospectively, hence no computation of fee under Sec.234E could be made for the TDS deducted prior to 01.06.2015.
We have given a thoughtful consideration to the issue before us and finding ourselves as being in agreement with the view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Tata Rice Mills (supra), hence are of the considered view that the ACIT-TDS, CPC Ghaziabad in the case before us had erred in levying fees under Sec.234E in respect of tax deducted at source for the four quarters prior to 01.06.2015 in respect of A.Y. 2015-16. We thus not being persuaded to subscribe to the view taken by the CIT(A) who had upheld the levy of fees by the A.O, thus set aside his order and vacate the demand raised by the A.O under Sec.234E in the hands of the assessee for all the four quarters for the year under consideration.
P a g e | 5 ITA Nos. 126 to 133/ASR/2017 A.Y. 2015-16 M/s GNA Udyog Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax 8. The appeals filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2015-16 i.e. ITA Nos. 126 to 133/ASR/2017 are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations. Order pronounced in the open court on 15.01.2019 Sd/- Sd/- (N.K. Saini) (Ravish Sood) Vice President Judicial Member Place: Jalandhar; Date: 15.01.2019 Ps. Rohit आदेशक���त�ल�पअ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 1. ��यथ�/ The Respondent. 2. आयकरआयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 3. आयकरआयु�त/ CIT 4. �वभागीय��त�न�ध, आयकरअपील�यअ�धकरण/ DR, 5. ITAT, Camp Bench, Jalandhar. गाड�फाईल / Guard file. 6. स�या�पत��त //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायकपंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकरअपील�यअ�धकरण/ITAT, Camp Bench, Jalandhar. Sr.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on Sr.PS/PS 2 Draft Placed before author Sr.PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the JM/AM Second Member 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second JM/AM Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS 15.1.19 Sr.PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on 15.1.19 Sr.PS/PS 7 File sent to the Bench Clerk 16.1.19 Sr.PS/PS 8 Date on which the file goes to the Head clerk 9 Date on which file goes to the AR 10 Date of Dispatch of order