SHRADDHA RAVINDRA SHIKHARE,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CPC (TDS), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4865/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 November 2019AY 2016-173 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the delay occurred after the amendment to Section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which incorporated the provisions of Section 234E for processing TDS statements, the levy of late filing fees was valid.

What were the facts?

The assessee delayed filing the statement of tax deduction at source in Form No. 26QB for AY 2016-17. Consequently, a late filing fee of Rs. 14,600 was levied under Section 234E.

What were the issues?

Whether the late filing fee under Section 234E is leviable for a delay in filing TDS statements when the processing occurs after the amendment of 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, “G” Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri S.Rifaur Rehman & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri. Rakesh Joshi
For Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar, D.R
Hearing: 27.11.2019Pronounced: 29.11.2019

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 4865/Mum/2017
ITA Nos.4865/Mum/2018

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PAN – BXVPS5256D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri. Rakesh Joshi Respondent by: Shri V. Vinod Kumar, D.R Date of Hearing: 27.11.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 29.11.2019 O R D E R

PER RAVISH SOOD, JM:

1.

The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-60, Mumbai, dated 14.06.2018 for A.Y. 2016-17, which in turn arises from the intimation received from the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Processing Cell-TDS, Ghaziabad, under Sec. 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short „Act‟), dated 25.04.2016. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Learned Assessing Officer in levying a late filing fees of Rs. 14,600/- u/s.234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal.”

Shraddha Ravindra Shikhare vs. ACIT, CPC – A.Y 2016-17 2 2. Briefly stated, the assessee had delayed filing of the statement of tax deduction at source in „Form No. 26QB‟ for A.Y. 2016-17. Resultantly, the ACIT, Central Processing Cell-TDS inter alia levied late filing fees under Sec. 234E of Rs. 14,600/-.

3.

Aggrieved, the assessee assailed the imposition of fees under Sec.234E. However, the contentions advanced by the assessee did not find favour with the CIT(A). Observing, that even for the period prior to 01.06.2015 the charging of fee under Sec.234E was a part of the statute which called for a levy of fee for default in furnishing the statements, the CIT(A) rejected the claim of the assessee and upheld the fees levied under Se. 234E.

4.

We have heard the authorised representatives for both the parties, and also perused the order/intimation of the lower authorities. On a perusal of Sec. 234E, we find, that the same envisages levy of fees on a person who fails to deliver or cause to be delivered a statement within the time prescribed in sub-section (3) of section 200 or the proviso to sub-section (3) of Section 206C. Admittedly, the assessee in the case before us had delayed the filing of the statement of tax deduction at source in „Form No. 26QB‟ for A.Y. 2016-17. As per the amendment made available in Sec. 200A, vide the Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f 01.06.2015, where a statement of tax deduction at source [or a correction statement] has been made by a person deducting any sum under section 200, such statement shall be processed, and the fees, if any, shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 234E. As the period in the case before us is subsequent to 01.06.2015 i.e the date on which Sec. 234E enabling levy of late filing fees was made available in Sec. 200A, therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of the ACIT, Central Processing Cell- TDS, Ghaziabad, who in our considered view had rightly levied late filing fees under Sec. 234E of Rs. 14,600/- on the assessee. Accordingly, finding no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) who had upheld the levy of fees by the ACIT, CPC, we uphold his order.

5.

Resultantly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 29/11/2019.

More judgments on Section 234E

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →