PRINT PLUS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS CIRCLE, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6003/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 November 20199 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 AO exceeded his jurisdiction by levying fees under Section 234E while processing the statement under Section 200A for a period prior to June 1, 2015. The levy was set aside, but the AO was permitted to pass a separate order if the limitation period had not expired.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) levied late filing fees under Section 234E while processing an intimation under Section 200A for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The assessee argued that Section 234E provisions were introduced later, making the levy invalid for the period prior to June 1, 2015.

What were the issues?

Whether late filing fees under Section 234E could be levied in an intimation under Section 200A for periods prior to June 1, 2015.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 200A,Section 234E

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘’C’’ BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI WASEEM AHMED

For Appellant: Shri N. K. Bhuta, AR
Hearing: 14/11/2019Pronounced: 15/11/2019

: Assessee by Shri N. K. Bhuta, AR : Revenue by Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora, DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 14/11/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 15/11/2019 आदेश/O R D E R

PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai dated 05/07/2018 (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”) arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as "the Act") dt. 23/12/2013 to the Assessment Year 2012-13. A.Y. 2012-13 2 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. Levying of Late filing Fees u/s. 234E in Intimation u/s. 200A was introduced with effect from 01/06/2015. As such, prior to 01/06/2015, Late Filing Fees could not be levied in Intimations u/s. 200A. As such, the levy of Late Filing Fees is bad in law and be deleted.

2. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or modify all or any the above ground at the time of hearing.”

3. The solitary issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT (A) erred in confirming the order of the AO by levying late filing fees under section 200A of the Act.

4. The facts in brief are that the AO while processing intimation under section 200A of the Act has charged late filing fee under section 234E of the Act for late filing of quarterly TDS statements in the specified form.

5. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to Ld. CIT (A) who confirmed the order of the AO.

6. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A) the assessee is in appeal before us.

7. The learned AR before us submitted that the provisions of section 234E of the Act were introduced with effect from 1st June 2015. Therefore, there cannot be any late filing fee under section 200A of the Act for the earlier years.

8. On the other hand, the learned DR before us vehemently supported the order of the AO.

9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. At the outset we note that this tribunal involving identical facts and circumstances in the case of Marumesa Exim Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The ITO, TDS in vide order dated 23-09- A.Y. 2012-13 3 2016 has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. The relevant extract of the order is reproduced as under:

More judgments on Section 200A

All 4,379 judgments and leading authorities on Section 200A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →