Tuttsan Pharma Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT, TDS, CPC, Gaziabad

ITA 2308/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 230820514 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 20-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 04-08-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L CHANDEL SR DR

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, AHMEDABAD .. , ( .) , BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGARWAL,VICE PRESIDENT (AZ) AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. ./ I.T.A. NO.2308/AHD/2015 AY 2014-15 2. ./ I.T.A. NO.2309/AHD/2015 AY 2013-14 1-2. TUTTSAN PHARMA PVT.LTD. TUTTSAN HOUSE BLOCK 196-228 N.H. NO.8A, SARKHEJ CHANGODAR ROAD AHMEDABAD-382 210 / VS. 1-2. THE DY.CIT TDS,CPC GAZIABAD % & ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AACCT 0336 M ( %( / APPELLANT ) .. ( )*%( / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE(S) BY : SHRI VINIT MOONDRA, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI S.L. CHANDEL, SR.DR +, - .& / DATE OF HEARING 20/10/2015 /012 - .& / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30/11/2015 / O R D E R PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : BOTH THE APPEALS BY ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST T HE COMMON ORDER OF THE LD.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) -8, AHMEDABAD [CIT(A) IN SHORT] DATED 27/05/2015 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS (AYS) 2014-15 & 2013-14. SINCE COMMON ISSUES ARE IN VOLVED IN BOTH THE APPEALS, THESE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEIN G DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA NOS.2308 & 2309/AHD/2015 TUTTSAN PHARMA PVT.LTD. VS. DCIT ASST.YEARS 2014-15 & 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY - 2 - 2. FIRST, WE TAKE UP ITA NO.2308/AHD/2015 FOR AY 2 014-15 AS THE LEAD CASE, SINCE SIMILAR FACTS ARE INVOLVED IN BOTH THE CASES. 2.1. IN ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO.2308/AHD/2015 F OR AY 2014-15, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF AP PEAL:- 1. IN HIS ORDER U/S.200A, THE LD.AO HAS ERRED IN L AW BY LEVYING PENALTY U/S.234E FOR DELAY IN FILING E TDS RETURNS AS UNDER : AY QUARTER APPEAL NO BEFORE CIT(A) LATE FILING FEES U/S.234E(RS.) 2013-14 QUARTER 3 (24Q) 195 84000 2014 - 15 QUARTER 3 (24Q) 196 1200 2013 - 14 QUARTER 3 (24Q) 198 17500 2014-15 QUARTER4 (24Q) 199 11400 2013-14 QUARTER 4 (24Q) 200 84200 3. ANY OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL SHALL BE SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. GROUNDS ARE INTER-CONNECTED AND, THEREFORE TH E SAME ARE DECIDED TOGETHER. 3.1. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT WHILE GENERATING INTIMATION U/S.200A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED T O AS THE ACT) LEVIED PENALTY U/S.234-E OF THE ACT FOR LATE FILING OF TDS RETURN VIDE ORDER DATED 15 TH JUNE-2014. AGGRIEVED BY THIS ACTION, ASSESSEE PR EFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE LD.CIT(A), WHO AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISS IONS CONFIRMED THE LATE FILING FEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS FURTHER IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. ITA NOS.2308 & 2309/AHD/2015 TUTTSAN PHARMA PVT.LTD. VS. DCIT ASST.YEARS 2014-15 & 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY - 3 - 4. AT THE OUTSET, LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUB MITTED THAT LATE FILING FEES OF TDS RETURN U/S.234-E OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 CAN BE LEVIED ONLY AFTER 01/06/2015. HE SUBMITTED THAT THIS ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH (ITAT B BENCH AH MEDABAD) IN THE CASE OF SIDDHI VINAYAK DEVELOPERS VS. DCIT IN ITA N OS.2321 AND 2322/AHD/2015 FOR AYS 2013-14 & 2014-15, DATED 14/ 10/2015. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL AGA INST THE LEVY OF LATE FILING FEE U/S.234-E OF THE I.T. ACT BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHO DISMISSED THE APPEAL VIDE ORDER DATED 18/05/2015. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE RESPECT IVE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS WHETHER THE LATE FILING FEE OF TDS RETURN U/S.234-E CAN BE LEVIED PRIOR TO 01/06/2015. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN THOROUGHLY EXAMINED BY THE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF SIDDHI VINAYAK DEVELOPERS VS. DCIT(SUPRA) AND HELD AS UNDER:- 5. WE HAVE DULY CONSIDERED RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. THE ITAT, AMRISTAR BENCH HAS MADE ELABO RATE DISCUSSION ON THIS ISSUE. THE FINDING HAS BEEN REPRODUCED IN THE CASE OF INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK VS. DCIT, GHAZIABAD RENDERED IN ITA NO.3271/AHD/201 4. IT READS AS UNDER: 5. I FIND THAT THE ISSUE IN APPEAL IS NOW SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF ITAT AMRITSAR BE NCH IN THE CASE OF SIBIA HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. DCIT - ITA NO. 90/ASR/2015, VIDE ITA NOS.2308 & 2309/AHD/2015 TUTTSAN PHARMA PVT.LTD. VS. DCIT ASST.YEARS 2014-15 & 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY - 4 - ORDER DATED 9TH JUNE, 2015, WHEREIN THE DIVISION BE NCH HAS INTER ALIA OBSERVED AS UNDER :- 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED T HE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. IN ADDITION TO HIS ARGUM ENT ON THE MERITS, LEARNED COUNSEL HAS ALSO INVITED OUR ATTENT ION TO THE REPORTS ABOUT THE DECISIONS OF VARIOUS HONBLE HIGH COURTS, INCLUDING HONBLE KERALA HIGH COURT, IN THE CASE OF NARATH MAPILA LP SCHOOL VS UNION OF INDIA [WP (C) 31498/20 13(J)], HONBLE KARANATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ADITHY A BIZOR P SOLUTIONS VS UNION OF INDIA [WP NO. 6918-6938/2014( T-IT), HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF OM PRAK ASH DHOOT VS UNION OF INDIA [WP NO. 1981 OF 2014] AND OF HON BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RASHMIKANT KUNDALI A VS UNION OF INDIA [WP NO. 771 OF 2014], GRANTING STAY ON THE DEMANDS RAISED IN RESPECT OF FEES UNDER SECTION 234 E. THE FULL TEXT OF THESE DECISIONS WERE NOT PRODUCED BEFORE US . HOWEVER, AS ADMITTEDLY THERE ARE NO ORDERS FROM THE HONBLE COU RTS ABOVE RETRAINING US FROM OUR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS IN RE SPECT OF THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL, AND AS, IN OUR HUMBLE UNDERS TANDING, THIS APPEAL REQUIRES ADJUDICATION ON A VERY SHORT LEGAL ISSUE, WITHIN A NARROW COMPASS OF MATERIAL FACTS, WE ARE PROCEEDING TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPEAL ON MERITS. 5. WE MAY PRODUCE, FOR READY REFERENCE, SECTION 23 4E OF THE ACT, WHICH WAS INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT 2012 AND WAS BROUGHT INTO EFFECT FROM 1ST JULY 2012. THIS STATU TORY PROVISION IS AS FOLLOWS: 234E. FEE FOR DEFAULTS IN FURNISHING STATEMENTS (1) WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, WHERE A PERSON FAILS TO DELIVER OR CAUSE TO BE DELIVERED A STATEMENT WITHIN THE TIME PRESCRIBED IN SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 2 00 OR THE PROVISO TO SUBSECTION (3) OF SECTION 206C, HE SHALL BE LIABLE TO ITA NOS.2308 & 2309/AHD/2015 TUTTSAN PHARMA PVT.LTD. VS. DCIT ASST.YEARS 2014-15 & 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY - 5 - PAY, BY WAY OF FEE, A SUM OF TWO HUNDRED RUPEES FOR EVERY DAY DURING WHICH THE FAILURE CONTINUES. (2) THE AMOUNT OF FEE REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (1 ) SHALL NOT EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF TAX DEDUCTIBLE OR COLLECTIBLE, AS THE CASE MAY BE. (3) THE AMOUNT OF FEE REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (1 ) SHALL BE PAID BEFORE DELIVERING OR CAUSING TO BE DELIVERED A STAT EMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OR T HE PROVISO TO SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 206C. (4) THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL APPLY TO A STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OR TH E PROVISO TO SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 206C WHICH IS TO BE DELI VERED OR CAUSED TO BE DELIVERED FOR TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE O R TAX COLLECTED AT SOURCE, AS THE CASE MAY BE, ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2012. 6. WE MAY ALSO REPRODUCE THE SECTION 200A WHICH WA S INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT 2009 WITH EFFECT FROM 1ST APRIL 201 0. THIS STATUTORY PROVISION, AS IT STOOD AT THE RELEVANT POINT OF TIM E, WAS AS FOLLOWS: 200A: PROCESSING OF STATEMENTS OF TAX DEDUCTED AT S OURCE (1) WHERE A STATEMENT OF TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE, O R A CORRECTION STATEMENT, HAS BEEN MADE BY A PERSON DEDUCTING ANY SUM (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO IN THIS SECTION AS DEDUCTOR) UNDER SECT ION 200, SUCH STATEMENT SHALL BE PROCESSED IN THE FOLLOWING MANNE R, NAMELY: (A) THE SUMS DEDUCTIBLE UNDER THIS CHAPTER SHALL BE COMPUTED AFTER MAKING THE FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENTS, NAMELY: (I) ANY ARITHMETICAL ERROR IN THE STATEMENT; OR (II) AN INCORRECT CLAIM, APPARENT FROM ANY INFORMAT ION IN THE STATEMENT; ITA NOS.2308 & 2309/AHD/2015 TUTTSAN PHARMA PVT.LTD. VS. DCIT ASST.YEARS 2014-15 & 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY - 6 - (B) THE INTEREST, IF ANY, SHALL BE COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF THE SUMS DEDUCTIBLE AS COMPUTED IN THE STATEMENT; (C) THE SUM PAYABLE BY, OR THE AMOUNT OF REFUND DUE TO, THE DEDUCTOR SHALL BE DETERMINED AFTER ADJUSTMENT OF AMOUNT COMP UTED UNDER CLAUSE (B) AGAINST ANY AMOUNT PAID UNDER SECTION 200 AND S ECTION 201, AND ANY AMOUNT PAID OTHERWISE BY WAY OF TAX OR INTEREST; (D) AN INTIMATION SHALL BE PREPARED OR GENERATED AN D SENT TO THE DEDUCTOR SPECIFYING THE SUM DETERMINED TO BE PAYABL E BY, OR THE AMOUNT OF REFUND DUE TO, HIM UNDER CLAUSE (C); AND (E) THE AMOUNT OF REFUND DUE TO THE DEDUCTOR IN PUR SUANCE OF THE DETERMINATION UNDER CLAUSE (C) SHALL BE GRANTED TO THE DEDUCTOR: PROVIDED THAT NO INTIMATION UNDER THIS SUB-SECTION SHALL BE SENT AFTER THE EXPIRY OF ONE YEAR FROM THE END OF THE FINANCIAL YE AR IN WHICH THE STATEMENT IS FILED. EXPLANATION : FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUB-SECTION, 'AN INCORRECT CLAIM APPARENT FROM ANY INFORMATION IN THE STATEMENT' SHA LL MEAN A CLAIM, ON THE BASIS OF AN ENTRY, IN THE STATEMENT (I) OF AN ITEM, WHICH IS INCONSISTENT WITH ANOTHER ENTRY OF THE SAME OR SOME OTHER ITEM IN SUCH STATEMENT; (II) IN RESPECT OF RATE OF DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOUR CE, WHERE SUCH RATE IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT; (2) FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROCESSING OF STATEMENTS UN DER SUB-SECTION (1), THE BOARD MAY MAKE A SCHEME FOR CENTRALISED PROCESS ING OF STATEMENTS OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE TO EXPEDITIOUSLY DETERMIN E THE TAX PAYABLE BY, OR THE REFUND DUE TO, THE DEDUCTOR AS REQUIRED UNDE R THE SAID SUBSECTION. 7. BY WAY OF FINANCE ACT 2015, AND WITH EFFECT FROM 1ST JUNE 2015, THERE IS AN AMENDMENT IN SECTION 200A AND THIS AMEN DMENT, AS STATED IN THE FINANCE ACT 2015, IS AS FOLLOWS: ITA NOS.2308 & 2309/AHD/2015 TUTTSAN PHARMA PVT.LTD. VS. DCIT ASST.YEARS 2014-15 & 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY - 7 - IN SECTION 200A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, IN SUB-SECTI ON (1), FOR CLAUSES (C) TO (E), THE FOLLOWING CLAUSES SHALL BE SUBSTITUTED WITH EFFECT FROM THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2015, NAMELY: (C) THE FEE, IF ANY, SHALL BE COMPUTED IN ACCORDAN CE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 234E; (D) THE SUM PAYABLE BY, OR THE AMOUNT OF REFUND DUE TO, THE DEDUCTOR SHALL BE DETERMINED AFTER ADJUSTMENT OF THE AMOUNT COMPUTED UNDER CLAUSE (B) AND CLAUSE (C) AGAINST ANY AMOUNT PAID U NDER SECTION 200 OR SECTION 201 OR SECTION 234E AND ANY AMOUNT PAID OTH ERWISE BY WAY OF TAX OR INTEREST OR FEE; (E) AN INTIMATION SHALL BE PREPARED OR GENERATED AN D SENT TO THE DEDUCTOR SPECIFYING THE SUM DETERMINED TO BE PAYABL E BY, OR THE AMOUNT OF REFUND DUE TO, HIM UNDER CLAUSE (D); AND (F) THE AMOUNT OF REFUND DUE TO THE DEDUCTOR IN PUR SUANCE OF THE DETERMINATION UNDER CLAUSE (D) SHALL BE GRANTED TO THE DEDUCTOR. 8. IN EFFECT THUS, POST 1ST JUNE 2015, IN THE COUR SE OF PROCESSING OF A TDS STATEMENT AND ISSUANCE OF INTIMATION UNDER SECT ION 200A IN RESPECT THEREOF, AN ADJUSTMENT COULD ALSO BE MADE IN RESPEC T OF THE FEE, IF ANY, SHALL BE COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 234E. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT WHAT IS IMPUGNED IN APPEAL BEFORE US IS THE INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 200A OF THE ACT, AS STATED IN SO MANY WORDS IN THE IMPUGNED INTIMATION ITSELF, AND, AS THE LAW STO OD, PRIOR TO 1ST JUNE 2015, THERE WAS NO ENABLING PROVISION THEREIN FOR R AISING A DEMAND IN RESPECT OF LEVY OF FEES UNDER SECTION 234E. WHILE E XAMINING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 200A, W E HAVE TO BE GUIDED BY THE LIMITED MANDATE OF SECTION 200A, WHICH, AT T HE RELEVANT POINT OF TIME, PERMITTED COMPUTATION OF AMOUNT RECOVERABLE F ROM, OR PAYABLE TO, THE TAX DEDUCTOR AFTER MAKING THE FOLLOWING ADJUSTM ENTS: (A). AFTER MAKING ADJUSTMENT ON ACCOUNT OF ARITHME TICAL ERRORS AND INCORRECT CLAIMS APPARENT FROM ANY INFORMATION IN THE STATEMENT ITA NOS.2308 & 2309/AHD/2015 TUTTSAN PHARMA PVT.LTD. VS. DCIT ASST.YEARS 2014-15 & 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY - 8 - - SECTION 200A(1)(A) (B). AFTER MAKING ADJUSTMENT FOR INTEREST, IF ANY, COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF SUMS DEDUCTIBLE AS COMPUTED IN THE STATEMENT. - SECTION 200A(1)(B) 9. NO OTHER ADJUSTMENTS IN THE AMOUNT REFUNDABLE T O, OR RECOVERABLE FROM, THE TAX DEDUCTOR, WERE PERMISSIBL E IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW AS IT EXISTED AT THAT POINT OF TIME. 10. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, IN OUR CONSI DERED VIEW, THE ADJUSTMENT IN RESPECT OF LEVY OF FEES UNDER SECTION 234E WAS INDEED BEYOND THE SCOPE OF PERMISSIBLE ADJUSTMENTS CONTEMP LATED UNDER SECTION 200A. THIS INTIMATION IS AN APPEALABLE ORDE R UNDER SECTION 246A(A), AND, THEREFORE, THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE E XAMINED LEGALITY OF THE ADJUSTMENT MADE UNDER THIS INTIMATION IN THE LI GHT OF THE SCOPE OF THE SECTION 200A. LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT DONE SO. HE HA S JUSTIFIED THE LEVY OF FEES ON THE BASIS OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2 34E. THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE HERE. THE ISSUE IS WHETHER SUCH A LEVY COULD BE EFFECTED IN THE COURSE OF INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 200A. THE ANSWER IS CLEARLY IN NEGATIVE. NO OTHER PROVISION ENABLING A DEMAND IN R ESPECT OF THIS LEVY HAS BEEN POINTED OUT TO US AND IT IS THUS AN ADMITT ED POSITION THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ENABLING PROVISION UNDER SECTION 200 A, NO SUCH LEVY COULD BE EFFECTED. AS INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 200A , RAISING A DEMAND OR DIRECTING A REFUND TO THE TAX DEDUCTOR, CAN ONLY BE PASSED WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THE END OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR WITHIN WHIC H THE RELATED TDS STATEMENT IS FILED, AND AS THE RELATED TDS STATEMEN T WAS FILED ON 19TH FEBRUARY 2014, SUCH A LEVY COULD ONLY HAVE BEEN MAD E AT BEST WITHIN 31ST MARCH 2015. THAT TIME HAS ALREADY ELAPSED AND THE DEFECT IS THUS NOT CURABLE EVEN AT THIS STAGE. IN VIEW OF THESE DI SCUSSIONS, AS ALSO BEARING IN MIND ENTIRETY OF THE CASE, THE IMPUGNED LEVY OF FEES UNDER SECTION 234 E IS UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW. WE, THEREFOR E, UPHOLD THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AND DELETE THE IMPUGNED L EVY OF FEE UNDER SECTION 234E OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE GETS THE RELI EF ACCORDINGLY. 6. WHEN THE ABOVE JUDICIAL PRECEDENT WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, HE DID NOT HAV E MUCH TO SAY EXCEPT ITA NOS.2308 & 2309/AHD/2015 TUTTSAN PHARMA PVT.LTD. VS. DCIT ASST.YEARS 2014-15 & 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY - 9 - TO PLACE HIS RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORIT IES BELOW. HE FAIRLY DID NOT DISPUTE THAT THE PROVISIONS ACCEPTING LEVY OF LATE FILING FEES UNDER SECTION 234E HAVE INDEED BEEN BROUGHT TO THE STATUTE W.E.F. 1ST JUNE, 2015 AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER WAS PASSED MUCH B EFORE THAT DATE. 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS AND BEARING IN MIND ENTIRETY OF THE CASE, I HEREBY DELETE THE LEVY OF LATE FILING F EES UNDER SECTION 234E OF THE ACT BY WAY OF IMPUGNED INTIMATION ISSUED. THE ASSESSEE GETS THE RELIEF ACCORDINGLY. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUN CED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2015. 6. WE DO NOT FIND ANY DISPARITY ON THE FACTS, THERE FORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE, WE ALLOW THE APPEALS OF THE AS SESSEE AND DELETE THE DEMAND RAISED UNDER SECTION 234E OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOW ED. 5.1. SINCE THERE IS NO CHANGE INTO THE FACTS AND C IRCUMSTANCES IN THE PRESENT CASE, THEREFORE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID DECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH, WE DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE THE LA TE FILING FEE OF TDS RETURN U/S.234E OF THE ACT. THUS, GROUNDS RAISED I N THE ASSESSEES APPEAL ARE ALLOWED. 6. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I TA NO.2308/AHD/2015 FOR AY 2014-15 IS ALLOWED. 8. NOW, WE TAKE UP THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO. 2309/AHD/2015 FOR AY 2013-14, WHEREIN FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED:- 1. IN HIS ORDER U/S.200A, THE LD.AO HAS ERRED IN L AW BY LEVYING PENALTY U/S.234E FOR DELAY IN FILING E TDS RETURNS AS UNDER : ITA NOS.2308 & 2309/AHD/2015 TUTTSAN PHARMA PVT.LTD. VS. DCIT ASST.YEARS 2014-15 & 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY - 10 - AY QUARTER APPEAL NO BEFORE CIT(A) LATE FILING FEES U/S.234(RS.) 2013-14 QUARTER2 (26Q) 194 64705 2013-14 QUARTER 3 (26Q) 197 19499 2013-14 QUARTER 4 (26Q) 201 84200 2014 - 15 QUARTER4 (2 6 Q) 202 1140 0 2. ANY OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL SHALL BE SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 8.1. IN THIS CASE, THE GROUNDS AND FACTS ARE IDEN TICAL TO THAT OF ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2014-15(SUPRA) WHICH HAS BEEN DECID ED BY US IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE WITH SIMILAR FINDINGS AS GIVEN IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE(SUPRA), WE DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE THE LATE FI LING FEE OF TDS RETURN U/S.234E OF THE ACT. THUS, GROUNDS RAISED IN THE A SSESSEES APPEAL ARE ALLOWED. AS A RESULT, ITA NO.2309/AHD/2015 FOR AY 2013-14 IS ALLOWED. 9. IN THE COMBINED RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR AYS 2014-15 & 2013-14 ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON MONDAY, THE 30 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( .. ) ( ) ( . ) ( G.D. AGARWAL ) ( KUL BHARAT ) VICE PRESIDENT (AZ) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED / 11 /2015 5...+, .+../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS ITA NOS.2308 & 2309/AHD/2015 TUTTSAN PHARMA PVT.LTD. VS. DCIT ASST.YEARS 2014-15 & 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY - 11 - !'#$%$&' / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. %( / THE APPELLANT 2. )*%( / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 678 9 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 9 ( ) / THE CIT(A)-8, AHMEDABAD 5. :; )+78 , . 782 , 6 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. ;< =, / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, *: ) //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION ..20.X.15 (COPIED MATTER) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER .. 30.X.15 3. OTHER MEMBER... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S.30.11.15 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 30.11.15 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER