Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8636 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
1 year(s) 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
17-07-2020
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
C
Assessment Year
2013-2014
Appeal Filed On
20-03-2019
Judgement Text
T HE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN (VP) & SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA ( A M) I.T.A. NO. 1674 /MUM/ 201 9 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 13 - 1 4 ) POPULAR CATERING SERVICES (PARTNER - VITHAL A. SHETTY) BUNGLOW - 1, PLOT NO. 162 ARIHANT VILLA, 15 TH ROAD CHEMBUR, MUMBAI - 71 PAN : AAKFP8531B V S . DCIT, CPC - TDS AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD MUMBAI - 400 020. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY NONE DEPARTMENT BY SHRI V. VINOD KUMAR DATE OF HEARING 12.03 . 20 20 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 17.07 . 20 20 O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) : - THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER OF LEARNED CIT (A) DATED 13.8.2018 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14. 2. T HE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER : - 1. THE LEARNED DEPUTY COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX CPC - TDS HAS ERRED IN LEVYING LATE FEE UNDER SECTION 234E AMOUNTING TO RS. 11,800. 2. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE LATE FEE IS LEVIED FOR THE PERIOD PRIOR TO 01.06.2015 I.E. PRIOR TO ENACTMENT OF SEC 234E. 3. THE APPELLANT RELIES ON TH E DECISION PASSED BY THE ITAT, MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF RAVI KUMAR VALECHA V/S. ASSESSING OFFICER TDS WARD, KALYAN, IN ITA NO. 4822/MUM/2016 DATED 15.06.2018. 4. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER BE SET ASIDE. 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES, LEAVES TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEND ANY OF THE AFORESAID GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING . POPULAR CATERING SERVICES 2 3. W E HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTICE. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE CAN BE DISPOSED OF BY PRODUCING THE RECORDS AND HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. 4. THE SOLE ISSUE IN DISPUTE IS CHARGEABILITY OF LATE FEE UNDER SECTION 234E OF THE I.T. ACT AMOUNTING TO RS . 11,800/ - , AS TO WHETHER THE SAME CAN BE LEVIED PRIOR TO 1.6.2015, I.E. PRIOR TO ENACTMENT OF SECTION 234E. T HE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONOURABLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN CASE OF RAJESH KOURANI VS. UOI (83 TAXM ANN.COM 137). THOUGH CIT (A) HAS NOTED THE DECISION OF HONOURABLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SRI FATHERAJ SINGHVI VS. UOI (73 TAXMANN.COM 252) WHICH IS IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE HE HAS CHOSEN NOT TO FOLLOW THE SAME. IN THIS REGARD H E ALSO DISTINGU ISHED THE DECISION OF HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF VEGETABLE P RODUCTS LTD. (88 ITR 192) BY REFERRING THAT THE SAID DECISION WAS IN CONNECTION WITH PENALTY . 5. U PON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION WE FIND THAT LEARNED CIT APPEALS HAS TOTALLY ERRED IN DIST INGUISHING THE DECISION OF HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF VEGETABLE PRODUCTS. THE RATIO ARISING FR OM THE SAID DECISION IS THAT IF TWO CONSTRUCTIONS ARE POSSIBLE THE ONE IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE SH O ULD BE APPLIED. IN THE PRESENT CASE WE NOTE THAT THE DECISION OF HONOURABLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IS IN FAVOUR O F THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY WE FOLLOW THE SAID DECISION ON THE TOUCHSTONE OF RATIO ARISING FROM HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF V EGETABLE P RODUCTS LTD. (SUPRA) . NO DECISION CONTRARY TO THIS FROM THE HONOURABLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE. FURTHERMORE AS REFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN GROUNDS OF APPEAL THE ISSUE IS ALSO COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF ITAT MUMBAI. 6. ACCORDINGLY WE SET A SIDE THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DECIDE THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE. POPULAR CATERING SERVICES 3 7. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED . ORDER HAS BE EN PRONOUNCED UNDER RULE 34(4) OF ITAT RULES ON 17.07.2020 . S D/ - SD/ - ( A.D. JAIN ) (SH A MIM YAHYA ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 17/07/ 20 20 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUAR D FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ) PS ITAT, MUMBAI
