← All Phrases

“Section 154(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 154Section 154(1)44 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 154(1) is Fatehraj Singhvi v. UOI (73 Taxmann.com 252), cited in 1,778 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 154(1)

Fatehraj Singhvi v. UOI
73 Taxmann.com 252 · 2016 · High Court
1,778
citing judgments

Late fees under section 234E are not applicable for periods prior to June 1, 2015, as the amendment to section 200A inserting clause (c) was effective from that date.

Kourani v. Union OF India
83 Taxmann.com 137 · 2017 · High Court
1,708
citing judgments

The fee under Section 234E for late filing of TDS/TCS statements cannot be levied retrospectively by processing an intimation under Section 200A for defaults occurring before the amendment allowing such processing.

CIT v. AIMIL Ltd.
321 ITR 508 · 2010 · High Court
1,629
citing judgments

Employee contributions to PF and ESIC, deposited beyond the due date under the respective Acts but within the due date for filing the income tax return under Section 139(1), are allowable deductions under Section 36(1)(va). Such disallowance cannot be made during processing under Section 143(1).

Fateh Raj Singhvi & Ors. v. UOI
289 CTR 602 · 2016 · High Court
844
citing judgments

A fee under Section 234E cannot be levied or adjusted in an intimation under Section 200A for TDS statements pertaining to periods prior to June 1, 2015, as the enabling amendment to Section 200A(1)(c) came into effect only from that date.

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
82 Taxmann.com 415 · 2017 · High Court
789
citing judgments

Disallowance computed under Section 14A, read with Rule 8D, cannot be added to book profits under Section 115JB for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes. Additionally, for Section 14A disallowance, only investments that yielded exempt income during the year are considered for calculating their average value.

Rashmikant Kundalia v. Union of India
54 Taxmann.com 200 · 2015 · High Court
702
citing judgments

Section 234E, levying late fees for delayed filing of TDS statements under section 200(3), is constitutionally valid and constitutes a compensatory fee, not a punitive penalty. Before treating any person as an assessee-in-default, an opportunity of being heard must be provided.

Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT
394 ITR 449 · 2017 · Supreme Court
683
citing judgments

Expenditure can only be disallowed under Section 14A if the income is exempt and not part of the total income. The Assessing Officer must first record dissatisfaction with the assessee's accounts or computation before proceeding to make a disallowance under Section 14A or applying Rule 8D.

Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. UOI
440 ITR 26 · 2022 · High Court
614
citing judgments

The fee under Section 234E of the Income-tax Act cannot be levied for defaults in filing TDS statements committed prior to June 1, 2015, as the provision for its levy became effective only from that date.

Judgments citing Section 154(1)

Red Rooster Performance (International) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), TDS, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 536/BANG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahured Rooster Performance Vs The Income Tax Officer (International) Pvt. Ltd. Ward 3(1), Tds B-10, Ngef Industrial Estate Hmt Building, Bellary Road Whitefield Road Bangalore 560032 Mahadevapura Post Bangalore 560048 Pan – Aaecr1751N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Mrs. Sunaina, Ca Respondent By: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing: 02/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 05/08/2022 O R D E R Per: L.P. Sahu, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1042909630(1) Of The Learned Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi In Appeal Dated 29.04.2022 For Ay 2014-15. 2. The Solitary Substantial Issue Raised By The Assessee Challenges Levying Of Late Fee Under Section 234E Of The Income Tax Act (The Act) For The Delay In Remittance Of Tds. 3. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Designing, Modification, Manufacture, Trading Of Prototype

For Appellant: Mrs. Sunaina, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 154(1)(c)Section 156Section 200ASection 220(1)Section 220(2)Section 234ESection 271H(1)(a)

interest under Section 220(2) of the Act. The assessee filed rectification application under Section 154 of the Act seeking nullification under Section 154(1)(c) of the Act stating that the demand under Section 234E of the Act is a mistake apparent from the records where the constitution