KAMLESH KATARE,GWALIOR vs. ITO, TDS-GWALIOR, GWALIOR

From the records, it emerges that the assessee was saddled with later filing fees u/s 234E for Rs.22,800/- while processing TDS return as filed by the assessee. The assessee sought rectification thereof u/s 154 which was rejected by Ld. AO. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal which met with no success. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

We find that this issue stand covered in assessee’s favor by the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatehraj Singhvi vs UOI (73 Taxmann.com 252) holding that the amendment in Section 200A came into effect only on 01-06-2015 and the same would have prospective effect. Therefore, there could not be any levy of fee for late filing fee u/s 234E of the Act while issuing intimation u/s 200A prior to 01-06-2015. The relevant findings of the Hon’ble Court were as under:- "26. Under these circumstances, we find that no further discussion would be required for examining the constitutional validity of section 234E of the Act. Save and except to observe that the question of constitutional validity of section 234E of the Act before the Division Bench of this Court shall remain open and shall not be treated as concluded. 27. In view of the aforesaid observations and discussion, the impugned notices under section 200A of the Act for computation and intimation for payment of fee under section 234E as they relate to for the period of the tax deducted prior to 1-6-2015 are set aside. It is clarified that the present judgment would not be interpreted to mean that even if the payment of the fees under section 234E already made as per demand/intimation under section 200A of the Act for the TDS for the period prior to 1-4-2015 is permitted to be reopened for claiming refund. The judgment will have prospective effect accordingly. It is further observed that the question of constitutional validity of Section 234E shall remain open to be considered by the Division Bench and shall not get concluded by the order of the learned Single Judge." It was thus held that amendment u/s 200A was prospective in nature and therefore, no computation of fee for demand or intimation u/s 200A could be made for the TDS deducted for the respective Assessment Years prior to 01-06-2015.