RAJLAXMI AGROTECH INDIA PVT. LTD,NANDED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (APPEALS), AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 321/PUN/2020Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 August 2022AY 2014-154 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 per the amendment to Section 200A(1)(c), could only be levied after June 1, 2015. Therefore, for the period in question (AY 2013-14, Q4), the levy was not applicable.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the CIT(A)'s order upholding the charging of interest under Section 234E for delayed TDS return submission. The appeals pertained to assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16.

What were the issues?

Whether the levy of fee under Section 234E for delayed TDS return submission is applicable for assessment year 2013-14, considering the amendment to Section 200A.

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, “B” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :

1.

These three appeals filed by the assessee against the common order dated 25-11-2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Aurangabad [‘CIT(A)’] upholding the charging of interest u/s. 234E of the Act in respect of above mentioned Quarters of the assessment years.

2.

We find no representation on behalf of the assessee nor any application filed seeking adjournment. Thus, the assessee called absent and set ex-parte. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of the appeals by hearing the ld. DR and perusing the material available on record.

3.

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.

4.

First, we shall take up appeal of assessee in for A.Y. 2013-14 (Q4).

5.

The assessee raised four grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) is justified in upholding the order passed by ACIT, CPC (TDS), Ghaziabad in confirming the late fees u/s. 234(E) r.w.s. 200A of the Act for delay in submission of TDS returns during A.Y. 2013-14 for Quarter 4 in the facts and circumstances of the case.

6. 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 4th 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 4 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) is not justified and it is set aside.

7.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed.

8.

We find that the issue raised in the appeals and the facts in & 322/PUN/2020 are identical to ITA No. 320/PUN/2020 except the variance in amount and period. Since, the facts in ITA Nos. 321 & 322/PUN/2020 are similar to ITA No. 320/PUN/2020, the findings given by us while deciding the grounds of appeal of assessee in ITA No. 320/PUN/2020 would mutatis mutandis apply to ITA Nos. 321 & 322/PUN/2020, as well. Both the appeals of assessee are allowed, accordingly.

9.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 26th August, 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 →