ARIHANT CHEMIST,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (INVESTIGATION), CIRCLE -12, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 710/PUN/2022Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 December 20224 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 held that the levy of fee under Section 234E, as provided by the insertion of Clause (c) to sub-section (1) of Section 200A, is applicable only after June 1, 2015. Since the defaults pertained to periods before this amendment, the levy was not justified.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the levy of fee for default in furnishing TDS statements for various quarters of assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The appeals were consolidated due to similar facts and issues.

What were the issues?

Whether the fee under Section 234E for default in furnishing TDS statements can be levied for periods prior to the amendment of Section 200A by the Finance Act, 2015.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 234E,Section 200A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

आदेश / ORDER

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :

1.

All these appeals filed by the assessee against the common order dated 29-07-2022 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi in respect of above mentioned Quarters of the assessment years.

2.

Since, the issues raised in all the appeals are similar basing on the same identical facts. Therefore, with the consent of both the parties, we proceed to hear all the appeals together and to pass a consolidated order for the sake of convenience.

3.

First, we shall take up appeal of assessee in for A.Y. 2013-14 (Q2).

4.

The only issue is to be decided is as to whether the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi is justified in upholding the levy of fee u/s. 234E of the Act for default in furnishing TDS statement for Quarter 2 of A.Y. 2013-14 in the facts and circumstances of the case.

5.

Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that fee for default in furnishing the TDS statements have been imposed on the assessee u/s. 234E of the Act for the 2nd quarter of the financial year 2012-13 (A.Y. 2013-14). Section 200A deals with processing of TDS statements of tax deducted at source and Clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 200A was inserted by the Finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 01-06-2015 providing for the levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act. In such circumstances, levy of such fee u/s.234E can be levied only after 01-06-2015 for the default committed by the assessee. We find that the period covered in the present subject appeal before us is Quarter 2nd of financial year 2012-13 (A.Y. 2013-14). Therefore, we hold that the amendment by insertion of Clause (c) to sub-section (1) of section 200A of the Act is not applicable, therefore, the order of CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi is not justified and it is set aside.

6.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed.

7.

We find that the issue raised in the appeals and the facts in to 714/PUN/2022 are identical to ITA No. 709/PUN/2022 except the variance in amount and period. Since, the facts in ITA Nos. 710 to 714/PUN/2022 are similar to ITA No. 709/PUN/2022, the findings given by us while deciding the grounds of appeal of assessee in ITA No. 709/PUN/2022 would mutatis mutandis apply to ITA Nos. 710 to 714/PUN/2022, as well. All the appeals of assessee are allowed, accordingly.

8.

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd December, 2022.

More judgments on Section 234E

All 4,792 judgments and leading authorities on Section 234E →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →