← All Phrases

“Section 200(3)”

Section References (mined)Section 200Section 200(3)818 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 200(3) is Fatehraj Singhvi v. UOI (73 Taxmann.com 252), cited in 1,778 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 200(3)

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.

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.

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.

Dundlod Shikshan Sansthan v. Union of India
63 Taxmann.com 243 · 2015 · High Court
397
citing judgments

The imposition of fees for late filing of TDS/TCS returns prior to the Finance Act, 2015 amendments was not illegal, and the Rajasthan High Court found no justification to interfere with such compensatory fees.

CIT v. Amitabh Bachchan
384 ITR 200 · 2016 · Supreme Court
264
citing judgments

The Commissioner's revisional power under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act is not limited to the points specified in the show-cause notice, nor is the exercise of this power contingent upon issuing a show-cause notice.

137 (Guj.) IV. Qatalys Software Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. UOI
115 Taxmann.com 345 · 2020 · High Court
178
citing judgments

The Madras High Court has upheld the validity of the levy of fees under Section 234E and penalties under Section 271H, finding the charging provision to be Section 234E, with the power to levy existing from 01/07/2012.

Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ld v. DCIT
23 Taxmann.com 265 · 2012 · High Court
147
citing judgments

The rule of consistency does not override the correct application of law and should not be applied if it leads to an anomalous outcome.

Judgments citing Section 200(3)

Income Tax Officer (TDS), Cuttack vs. Maa Tarini Transport Private Limited, Barbil, Keonjhar

In the result, appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 455/CTK/2024[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.454 & 455/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Income Tax Officer (Tds), Income Tax Officer (Tds), Vs. Maa Tarini Transport Pvt Maa Tarini Transport Pvt Cuttack Ltd., Ltd., Bhadrasahi, Bhadrasahi, Barbil, Barbil, Keonjhar Pan/Gir No.Aafcm 0416 L No.Aafcm 0416 L (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/01/20 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/01/20 025 O R D E R Per Bench These Two These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated 10.9.2024 In Appeal No.Cit(A),Cuttack/10412/2018 Cit(A),Cuttack/10412/2018-19 & Cit(A),Cuttack/10413/2018 19 & Cit(A),Cuttack/10413/2018-19 For The Assessment Year Essment Year 2014-15 Deleting The Levy Of Fees U/S.234E Of The Act. Deleting The Levy Of Fees U/S.234E Of The Act.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

that section 234E of the Act provides for payment of fee if the assessee fails to deliver the statement as prescribed in Section 200(3) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has every authority to levy fee either by a separate order or while processing the statement under Section

Income Tax Officer, Cuttack vs. Maa Tarini Transport Private Limited, Barbil Koenjhar

In the result, appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 454/CTK/2024[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.454 & 455/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Income Tax Officer (Tds), Income Tax Officer (Tds), Vs. Maa Tarini Transport Pvt Maa Tarini Transport Pvt Cuttack Ltd., Ltd., Bhadrasahi, Bhadrasahi, Barbil, Barbil, Keonjhar Pan/Gir No.Aafcm 0416 L No.Aafcm 0416 L (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/01/20 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/01/20 025 O R D E R Per Bench These Two These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated Of The Ld Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi Dated 10.9.2024 In Appeal No.Cit(A),Cuttack/10412/2018 Cit(A),Cuttack/10412/2018-19 & Cit(A),Cuttack/10413/2018 19 & Cit(A),Cuttack/10413/2018-19 For The Assessment Year Essment Year 2014-15 Deleting The Levy Of Fees U/S.234E Of The Act. Deleting The Levy Of Fees U/S.234E Of The Act.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

that section 234E of the Act provides for payment of fee if the assessee fails to deliver the statement as prescribed in Section 200(3) of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has every authority to levy fee either by a separate order or while processing the statement under Section

Pudhari Publications Pvt.Ltd., Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kolhapur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1396/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: None (Written Submission)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 133(6)Section 194CSection 200(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271H

erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271H for furnishing incorrect information in the statement required to be delivered under section 200(3) which has been disputed as above. 5. The assessee craves leave to amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal. 6. It is prayed that

Pudhari Publications Pvt.Ltd., Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kolhapur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1395/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: None (Written Submission)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 133(6)Section 194CSection 200(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271H

erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271H for furnishing incorrect information in the statement required to be delivered under section 200(3) which has been disputed as above. 5. The assessee craves leave to amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal. 6. It is prayed that

Pudhari Publications Pvt.Ltd., Maharashtra vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kolhapur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1394/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

For Appellant: None (Written Submission)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 133(6)Section 194CSection 200(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271H

erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271H for furnishing incorrect information in the statement required to be delivered under section 200(3) which has been disputed as above. 5. The assessee craves leave to amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal. 6. It is prayed that