SHRI SHANTILAL JAIN,JABALPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD
In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed
ITA 180/JAB/2018[2013-14(26Q, 4th Qtr.)]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur04 Apr 2019
Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2013-14 Shanti Lal Jain V. Dcit Prop. Jain Advertising Agency Cpc, Tds Arya Samaj Market Ghaziabad Russel Chowk, Jabalpur Tan/Pan:Jbpso6909A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Anil Kumar Gupta, Advocate Respondent By: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 04 04 2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 04 04 2019 O R D E R Per A. D. Jain, V.P.: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jabalpur, Dated 27/6/2018 For Assessment Year 2013-14, Taking The Following Grounds: 1. On The Facts & Under The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Cit (A) Has Erred In Passing The Order Ex-Parte On 26/6/2018 While The Counsel'S Junior Had Filed The Application For Adjournment On 21/6/2018 For Extension Of Hearing For Further 20 Days But He Passed The Order On 26/6/2018 In Undue Haste. 2. That The Id. A.O. (Tds-Cpc) Had Wrongly Levied A Late Fees Of Rs.16,800/-And Issued Order U/S 200A Of The Act. 3. That The Id. A.O. Has Charged The Late Fee Of Rs.16,800/- Without Sanction Of Law As Subsection (3) Of The Section 234E Of The Act States It Shall Be Paid Before Delivering A Tds Statement. It Means That Any Late Fees Should Have Been Deposited Just At
For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougale, D.R
Section 156Section 190Section 200ASection 204Section 234ESection 285
204 of the Act has made the person responsible for section 190 to 203AA and section 285, this phrase does not cover
Section 234E, it means no one is responsible for default u/s 234E.
6. The Id. A.O. erred in passing the intimation u/s 200A of the Act which does not permit processing of TDS
