Madhya Pradesh Today Media Ltd., Bhopal V. ITO-TDS, INDORE

ITA 575/Ind/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2959 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 23-11-2020
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R S AMBEDKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: ARPIT GAUR CAS
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; TDS
• Section: 234E; 200A; 13

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON'BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 M/S MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA LTD, PLOT NO.5, PRESS COMPLEX, ZON3-1, M.P. NAGAR, BHOPAL TAN: BPLM08815C/PAN AAGCM9822K ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 (24 Q-II, Q-III, Q-IV, 26 Q-II, Q-III, & Q-IV ) : APPELLANT V/S ITO (TDS)-I, INDORE : RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY S/ SHRI ANIL KAMAL GARG & ARPIT GAUR, CAS RESPONDENT BY SHRI R. S . AMBEDKAR , SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 23.11.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 24 .11.2020 / O R D E R PER BENCH: ITANOS. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA PVT. LTD 2 THE ABOVE CAPTIONED 6 APPEALS ARE AT THE INSTANCE O F ASSESSEE AND IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS OF LD. COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-I, INDORE (IN SHORT CIT(A))DATED 06. 03.2019. 2. ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - ITA NO.574/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 (24 QTR-II) 1. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED, BOTH ON FAC TS AND IN LAW, IN UPHOLDING THE LEVYING OF FEE AT RS.75,000/-- UNDER S.234E AND CHARGING OF INTEREST UNDER S. 220(2) AT RS.27,750/- OF THE ACT THEREON THROUGH AN ORDER UNDER S.200A OF THE ACT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MAT ERIAL FACT THAT IN AN ORDER PASSED UNDER S.200A, THE LEVY OF FEE UNDER S. 234E WAS NOT PERMISSIBLE AT THE RELEVANT TIME AS THE NECESSARY A MENDMENT HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN THE STATUTE BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2015 W.E .F. 01-06-2015 ONLY. 2. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT APPRE CIATING THE LEGAL POSITION THAT IN ABSENCE OF PROVISIONS OF CLAUSES ( C) TO (F) INSERTED IN SUB- SECTION (1) OF SECTION 200A OF THE ACT BY THE FINAN CE ACT, 2015 W.E.F. 1-6- 2015, THERE WAS NEITHER ANY AUTHORITY, FOR THE REVE NUE, TO COLLECT ANY FEES AS PROVIDED UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT NOR THERE WAS A NY RIGHT AVAILABLE TO AN ASSESSEE TO PREFER AN APPEAL AGAINST CHARGING OF SUCH LEVY. THE ID. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THAT HAVING ADMITTE D THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER S.246A(1)(A) OF THE ACT, HE HAD IMPL IEDLY ACCEPTED THE POSITION THAT POWER TO LEVY FEES UNDER S.234E OF TH E ACT GOT EMANATED FROM THE PROVISIONS OF S.200A OF THE ACT. 3. THAT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED C IT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE LEGAL POSITION THAT UNDER THE P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 234E ITANOS. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA PVT. LTD 3 OF THE ACT, THE FEES WAS COMPULSORILY REQUIRED TO B E COLLECTIBLE FROM THE DEDUCTOR BEFORE DELIVERING OR CAUSING TO BE DELIVER ED A STATEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (3) OF SE CTION 200 OF THE ACT AND NO AUTHORITY HAS BEEN VESTED WITH THE REVENUE AUTHO RITIES TO COLLECT ANY FEES UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT AFTER HAVING BEEN ALLO WED AN ASSESSEE TO DELIVER HIS STATEMENT. 4. THAT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED C IT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL FACT THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE APPELLANT, FOR LATE SUBMISSION OF TDS STATEMENTS WI THIN THE TIME SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 AND CONSEQUENTLY, NO LATE FEE UNDER S.234E WAS LEVIABLE . 5.THAT, THE APPELLANT FURTHER CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER AND/OR AMEND ANY OF THE FOREGOING GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS AND WHEN CONS IDERED NECESSARY. ITA NO.575/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 (24 QTR-III) 1. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED, BOTH ON FAC TS AND IN LAW, IN UPHOLDING THE LEVYING OF FEE AT RS.70,600/-- UNDER S.234E AND CHARGING OF INTEREST UNDER S. 220(2) AT RS.26,122/- OF THE ACT THEREON THROUGH AN ORDER UNDER S.200A OF THE ACT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MAT ERIAL FACT THAT IN AN ORDER PASSED UNDER S.200A, THE LEVY OF FEE UNDER S. 234E WAS NOT PERMISSIBLE AT THE RELEVANT TIME AS THE NECESSARY A MENDMENT HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN THE STATUTE BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2015 W.E .F. 01-06-2015 ONLY. 2.THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT APP RECIATING THE LEGAL POSITION THAT IN ABSENCE OF PROVISIONS OF CLAUSES ( C) TO (F) INSERTED IN SUB- SECTION (1) OF SECTION 200A OF THE ACT BY THE FINAN CE ACT, 2015 W.E.F. 1-6- 2015, THERE WAS NEITHER ANY AUTHORITY, FOR THE REVE NUE, TO COLLECT ANY FEES ITANOS. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA PVT. LTD 4 AS PROVIDED UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT NOR THERE WAS A NY RIGHT AVAILABLE TO AN ASSESSEE TO PREFER AN APPEAL AGAINST CHARGING OF SU CH LEVY. THE ID. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THAT HAVING ADMITTED THE A PPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER S.246A(1)(A) OF THE ACT, HE HAD IMPLIEDLY ACC EPTED THE POSITION THAT POWER TO LEVY FEES UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT GOT EMAN ATED FROM THE PROVISIONS OF S.200A OF THE ACT. 3.THAT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE LEGAL POSITION THAT UNDER THE P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 234E OF THE ACT, THE FEES WAS COMPULSORILY REQUIRED TO B E COLLECTIBLE FROM THE DEDUCTOR BEFORE DELIVERING OR CAUSING TO BE DELIVER ED A STATEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (3) OF SE CTION 200 OF THE ACT AND NO AUTHORITY HAS BEEN VESTED WITH THE REVENUE AUTHO RITIES TO COLLECT ANY FEES UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT AFTER HAVING BEEN ALLO WED AN ASSESSEE TO DELIVER HIS STATEMENT. 4.THAT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL FACT THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE APPELLANT, FOR LATE SUBMISSION OF TDS STATEMENTS WI THIN THE TIME SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 AND CONSEQUENTLY, NO LATE FEE UNDER S.234E WAS LEVIABLE . 5.THAT, THE APPELLANT FURTHER CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER AND/OR AMEND ANY OF THE FOREGOING GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS AND WHEN CONS IDERED NECESSARY. ITA NO.576/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 (24 QTR-IV) 1.THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED, BOTH ON F ACTS AND IN LAW, IN UPHOLDING THE LEVYING OF FEE AT RS.46,600/-- UNDER S.234E AND CHARGING OF INTEREST UNDER S. 220(2) AT RS.17,242/- OF THE ACT THEREON THROUGH AN ORDER ITANOS. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA PVT. LTD 5 UNDER S.200A OF THE ACT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MAT ERIAL FACT THAT IN AN ORDER PASSED UNDER S.200A, THE LEVY OF FEE UNDER S. 234E WAS NOT PERMISSIBLE AT THE RELEVANT TIME AS THE NECESSARY A MENDMENT HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN THE STATUTE BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2015 W.E .F. 01-06-2015 ONLY. 2. THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT AP PRECIATING THE LEGAL POSITION THAT IN ABSENCE OF PROVISIONS OF CLAUSES ( C) TO (F) INSERTED IN SUB- SECTION (1) OF SECTION 200A OF THE ACT BY THE FINAN CE ACT, 2015 W.E.F. 1-6- 2015, THERE WAS NEITHER ANY AUTHORITY, FOR THE REVE NUE, TO COLLECT ANY FEES AS PROVIDED UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT NOR THERE WAS A NY RIGHT AVAILABLE TO AN ASSESSEE TO PREFER AN APPEAL AGAINST CHARGING OF SU CH LEVY. THE ID. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THAT HAVING ADMITTED THE A PPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER S.246A(1)(A) OF THE ACT, HE HAD IMPLIEDLY ACC EPTED THE POSITION THAT POWER TO LEVY FEES UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT GOT EMAN ATED FROM THE PROVISIONS OF S.200A OF THE ACT. 3.THAT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE LEGAL POSITION THAT UNDER THE P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 234E OF THE ACT, THE FEES WAS COMPULSORILY REQUIRED TO B E COLLECTIBLE FROM THE DEDUCTOR BEFORE DELIVERING OR CAUSING TO BE DELIVER ED A STATEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (3) OF SE CTION 200 OF THE ACT AND NO AUTHORITY HAS BEEN VESTED WITH THE REVENUE AUTHO RITIES TO COLLECT ANY FEES UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT AFTER HAVING BEEN ALLO WED AN ASSESSEE TO DELIVER HIS STATEMENT. 4.THAT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL FACT THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE APPELLANT, FOR LATE SUBMISSION OF TDS STATEMENTS WI THIN THE TIME SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 AND CONSEQUENTLY, NO LATE FEE UNDER S.234E WAS LEVIABLE . 5.THAT, THE APPELLANT FURTHER CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER AND/OR AMEND ANY ITANOS. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA PVT. LTD 6 OF THE FOREGOING GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS AND WHEN CONS IDERED NECESSARY. ITA NO.578/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 (26 QTR-III) 1.THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED, BOTH ON F ACTS AND IN LAW, IN UPHOLDING THE LEVYING OF FEE AT RS.70,600/-- UNDER S.234E AND CHARGING OF INTEREST UNDER S. 220(2) AT RS.26,775/- OF THE ACT THEREON THROUGH AN ORDER UNDER S.200A OF THE ACT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MAT ERIAL FACT THAT IN AN ORDER PASSED UNDER S.200A, THE LEVY OF FEE UNDER S. 234E WAS NOT PERMISSIBLE AT THE RELEVANT TIME AS THE NECESSARY A MENDMENT HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN THE STATUTE BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2015 W.E .F. 01-06-2015 ONLY. 2.THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT APP RECIATING THE LEGAL POSITION THAT IN ABSENCE OF PROVISIONS OF CLAUSES ( C) TO (F) INSERTED IN SUB- SECTION (1) OF SECTION 200A OF THE ACT BY THE FINAN CE ACT, 2015 W.E.F. 1-6- 2015, THERE WAS NEITHER ANY AUTHORITY, FOR THE REVE NUE, TO COLLECT ANY FEES AS PROVIDED UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT NOR THERE WAS A NY RIGHT AVAILABLE TO AN ASSESSEE TO PREFER AN APPEAL AGAINST CHARGING OF SU CH LEVY. THE ID. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THAT HAVING ADMITTED THE A PPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER S.246A(1)(A) OF THE ACT, HE HAD IMPLIEDLY ACC EPTED THE POSITION THAT POWER TO LEVY FEES UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT GOT EMAN ATED FROM THE PROVISIONS OF S.200A OF THE ACT. 3. THAT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNE D CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE LEGAL POSITION THAT UNDER THE P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 234E OF THE ACT, THE FEES WAS COMPULSORILY REQUIRED TO B E COLLECTIBLE FROM THE DEDUCTOR BEFORE DELIVERING OR CAUSING TO BE DELIVER ED A STATEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (3) OF SE CTION 200 OF THE ACT AND NO AUTHORITY HAS BEEN VESTED WITH THE REVENUE AUTHO RITIES TO COLLECT ANY FEES UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT AFTER HAVING BEEN ALLO WED AN ASSESSEE TO DELIVER HIS STATEMENT. ITANOS. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA PVT. LTD 7 4.THAT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL FACT THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE APPELLANT, FOR LATE SUBMISSION OF TDS STATEMENTS WI THIN THE TIME SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 AND CONSEQUENTLY, NO LATE FEE UNDER S.234E WAS LEVIABLE . 5.THAT, THE APPELLANT FURTHER CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER AND/OR AMEND ANY OF THE FOREGOING GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS AND WHEN CONS IDERED NECESSARY. ITA NO.579/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 (26 QTR-IV) 1.THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED, BOTH ON F ACTS AND IN LAW, IN UPHOLDING THE LEVYING OF FEE AT RS.46,600/-- UNDER S.234E AND CHARGING OF INTEREST UNDER S. 220(2) AT RS.17,242/- OF THE ACT THEREON THROUGH AN ORDER UNDER S.200A OF THE ACT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MAT ERIAL FACT THAT IN AN ORDER PASSED UNDER S.200A, THE LEVY OF FEE UNDER S. 234E WAS NOT PERMISSIBLE AT THE RELEVANT TIME AS THE NECESSARY A MENDMENT HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN THE STATUTE BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2015 W.E .F. 01-06-2015 ONLY. 2.THAT, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT APP RECIATING THE LEGAL POSITION THAT IN ABSENCE OF PROVISIONS OF CLAUSES ( C) TO (F) INSERTED IN SUB- SECTION (1) OF SECTION 200A OF THE ACT BY THE FINAN CE ACT, 2015 W.E.F. 1-6- 2015, THERE WAS NEITHER ANY AUTHORITY, FOR THE REVE NUE, TO COLLECT ANY FEES AS PROVIDED UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT NOR THERE WAS A NY RIGHT AVAILABLE TO AN ASSESSEE TO PREFER AN APPEAL AGAINST CHARGING OF SU CH LEVY. THE ID. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THAT HAVING ADMITTED THE A PPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER S.246A(1)(A) OF THE ACT, HE HAD IMPLIEDLY ACC EPTED THE POSITION THAT POWER TO LEVY FEES UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT GOT EMAN ATED FROM THE PROVISIONS OF S.200A OF THE ACT. 3.THAT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN ITANOS. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA PVT. LTD 8 NOT CONSIDERING THE LEGAL POSITION THAT UNDER THE P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 234E OF THE ACT, THE FEES WAS COMPULSORILY REQUIRED TO B E COLLECTIBLE FROM THE DEDUCTOR BEFORE DELIVERING OR CAUSING TO BE DELIVER ED A STATEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (3) OF SE CTION 200 OF THE ACT AND NO AUTHORITY HAS BEEN VESTED WITH THE REVENUE AUTHO RITIES TO COLLECT ANY FEES UNDER S.234E OF THE ACT AFTER HAVING BEEN ALLO WED AN ASSESSEE TO DELIVER HIS STATEMENT. 4THAT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL FACT THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE APPELLANT, FOR LATE SUBMISSION OF TDS STATEMENTS WI THIN THE TIME SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 AND CONSEQUENTLY, NO LATE FEE UNDER S.234E WAS LEVIABLE . 5.THAT, THE APPELLANT FURTHER CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER AND/OR AMEND ANY OF THE FOREGOING GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS AND WHEN CON SIDERED NECESSARY. 3. FROM PERUSAL OF THE GROUNDS FILED IN THE APPEALS WHICH HAVE BEEN ARGUED BY THE COUNSEL, ONLY ONE ISSUE NEEDS TO BE ADJUDICATED AS TO WHETHER THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES WERE JUSTIFIE D IN LEVYING THE LATE FEES U/S 234E OF THE ACT IN THE STATEMENT PROC ESSED U/S 200A OF THE ACT. 4. BRIEF FACTS COMMON TO THESE APPEALS ARE THAT TDS RETURN FOR 24 QUARTER-II, 24 QUARTER-III AND 24 QUARTER-IV AN D 26 QUARTER-II, 26 QUARTER-III AND 26 QUARTER-IV, FOR FINANCIAL YEA R 2013-14 RESPECTIVELY WERE FILED ON 03.01.2014 WERE PROCESSE D BY CENTRAL PROCESSING CELL (IN SHORT CPC) ON 21.03.2014 AFTER LEVYING FEE U/S ITANOS. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA PVT. LTD 9 234E OF THE ACT AT RS.1,02,750/-, RS.96,722/-, RS.6 3,842/-, RS. 1,21,903/-, RS.97,355/- AND RS.63,842/- RESPECTIVEL Y. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) BUT FAI LED TO SUCCEED. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE VEHEMENTLY ARGUED A ND SUBMITTED THAT THE CASE OF ASSESSEE IS SQUARELY COV ERED ON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE I.T.A.T. BENCH, INDORE IN THE C ASE OF EXECUTIVE ENGINEER & OTHERS (SUPRA) ITA NO.457 TO 459/IND/2019 ORDER DATED 26.7.2019. 6. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY ARGUE D SUPPORTING ORDERS OF BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 7. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORDS PLACED BEFORE US AND ALSO CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH TH E DECISIONS RELIED AND REFERRED BY LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE . SOLE ISSUE RAISED IN THIS TWO APPEALS IS AGAINST THE LEVY OF F EE U/S 234E OF THE ACT BY CPC FOR DELAY IN FILING THE TDS QUARTERLY RE TURNS AND LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING SUCH LEVY OF FEE U/S 234E AT RS.1 ,02,750/- (24Q- II), RS.96,722/(24Q-III) -, RS.63,842/- (24 Q-IV), RS. 1,21,903/- (26 Q-II), RS.97,355/-(26 Q-III) AND RS.63,842/- (26 Q- IV) RESPECTIVELY ITANOS. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA PVT. LTD 10 FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2013-14. QUARTERLY RETURNS WERE FILED AFTER THE DUE DATE. 8. WE OBSERVE THAT THE ISSUE OF LEVY OF FEE U/S 234 E HAS CAME BEFORE US ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS. AS REGARDS THE FATE OF FEES LEVIED U/S 234E OF THE ACT FOR THE RETURNS FILED AND PROCE SSED BEFORE 1.6.15 WE AFTER CONSIDERING THE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEM ENTS HAVE TAKEN A CONSISTENT VIEW THAT THE AMENDMENT BROUGHT IN FIN ANCE ACT, 2015 W.E.F. 1.6.2015 UNDER SECTION 200A (CLAUSE (C)] OF THE ACT IS PROSPECTIVE IN NATURE THEREBY EMPOWERING THE REVENU E AUTHORITIES TO CHARGE FEE U/S 234E OF THE ACT ONLY AFTER 1.6.20 15. VARIOUS JUDGMENTS REFERRED AND RELIED BY LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE ALSO LAYS DOWN COMMON RATIO THAT SINCE THE AMENDMENT BRO UGHT IN BY FINANCE ACT 2015 U/S 200A(C ) OF THE ACT W.E.F. 1.6 .2015 IS PROSPECTIVE IN NATURE, THEREFORE REVENUE AUTHORITI ES ARE NOT EMPOWERED TO LEVY THE FEES U/S 234E IN THE PROCESSI NG COMPLETED BEFORE 1.6.2015. 9. IN THE INSTANT CASE THE DATE OF FILING THE QUART ERLY RETURN AND THEIR PROCESSING IS BEFORE 1.6.2015, SO IN THESE GI VEN FACTS WHETHER THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES WERE JUSTIFIED IN LEVYING F EE U/S 234E OF THE ACT?. WE FIND THAT SIMILAR ISSUE AND SAME FACTS CA ME UP FOR ITANOS. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA PVT. LTD 11 ADJUDICATION BEFORE US IN THE CASE OF EXECUTIVE ENGINEER & OTHERS ITA NO.457 TO 459/IND/2019 ORDER DATED 26.7.2019 WH EREIN WE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS (RELEVANT EXTRACT) :- 14. NOW COMING TO THE LAST CONTENTION AS WELL AS MA IN ISSUE THAT WHETHER IN ALL THE REMAINING CASES EXCEPT THAT OF ROHIT SINGH IN ITANO.422/IND/2019 WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN LEVYING THE FEE U/S 234E OF THE ACT. T HE COMMON FACT IN ALL THESE CASES ARE THAT THE DATE OF FILING TDS RETURN AS WELL AS DATE OF CPC ORDER IS AFTER 01.06.2015. W E OBSERVE THAT RECENTLY COORDINATE BENCH OF JAIPUR IN THE CASE OF SHRI UTTAM CHAND GANGWAL VS ACIT IN ITA NO . 764/JP/2017 DATED 23/01/2019 ADJUDICATED THE SIMILA R ISSUE OF LEVY OF FEE U/S 234E OF THE ACT IN THE TDS RETURN A ND THE CPC ORDER PASSED AFTER 01.06.2015. FOLLOWING DECISION WAS REN DERED BY THE COORDINATE BENCH: IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS TDS RET URN IN FORM NO. 26Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED 31ST MARCH, 2015 ON 22ND JULY , 2015 AND THE SAME WAS PROCESSED AND AN INTIMATION DATED 30 JULY, 2015 WAS ISSUED BY THE AO U/S 200 A OF THE ACT . THUS, BOTH THE FILING OF THE RETURN OF INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE AND PROCESSING THE REOF HAS HAPPENED MUCH AFTER 1.6.2015 I.E, THE DATE OF ASSUM PTION OF JURISDICTION BY THE AO U/S 200A(1)(C) TO LEVY FEES UNDER SECTION 234E OF THE ACT. EVEN THOUGH THE QUARTERLY RETURN PERTA INS TO QUARTER ENDED 31.3.2015, THE FACT REMAINS THAT THERE IS A C ONTINUING DEFAULT EVEN AFTER 1.6.2015 AND THE RETURN WAS ACTUALLY FIL ED ON 22.07.2015. THE SAID PROVISIONS CANNOT BE READ TO SAY THAT WHER E AN ASSESSEE FILE HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE PERIOD FALLING AFTER 1 .6.2015 AND THERE IS A DELAY ON HIS PART TO FILE THE RETURN IN TIME, HE WI LL SUFFER THE LEVY OF FEES, HOWEVER, AN ASSESSEE WHO HAS DELAYED THE FILI NG OF THE RETURN OF INCOME EVEN PERTAINING TO THE PERIOD PRIOR TO 1.06. 2015, HE CAN BE ABSOLVED FROM SUCH LEVY EVEN THOUGH THERE IS A CONT INUOUS DEFAULT ITA NO. 764/JP/2017 SHRI UTTAM CHAND GANGWAL, AJMER VS. ACIT, GHAZIABAD ON HIS PART EVEN AFTER 1.6.2015. IN OUR V IEW, THE AO HAS ACQUIRED THE JURISDICTION TO LEVY THE FEES AS ON 1. 06.2015 AND ITANOS. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA PVT. LTD 12 THEREFORE, ANY RETURN FILED AND PROCESSED AFTER 1.6 .2015 WILL FALL WITHIN HIS JURISDICTION WHERE ON OCCURRENCE OF ANY DEFAULT ON PART OF THE ASSESSEE, HE CAN LEVY FEE SO MANDATED U/S 234E OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE PERIOD TO WHICH THE QUARTERLY RETURN PERTAINS, WHERE THE RETURN IS FILED AFTER 1.6.2015, THE AO CAN LEVY FEE UNDER SECTION 234E OF THE ACT. AT THE SAME TIME, IN TERMS OF DETERMINING THE PERIOD FOR WHICH FEES CAN BE LEVIED , ONLY SAVING COULD BE THAT FOR THE PERIOD OF DELAY FALLING PRIOR TO 1. 06.2015, THERE COULD NOT BE ANY LEVY OF FEES AS THE ASSUMPTION OF JURISD ICTION TO LEVY SUCH FEES HAVE BEEN HELD BY THE COURTS TO BE PROSPECTIVE IN NATURE. HOWEVER, WHERE THE DELAY CONTINUES BEYOND 1.06.2015 , THE AO IS WELL WITHIN HIS JURISDICTION TO LEVY FEES UNDER SECTION 234E FOR THE PERIOD STARTING 1.06.2015 TO THE DATE OF ACTUAL FIL ING OF THE TDS RETURN. IN LIGHT OF THE SAME, IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE LEVY OF FEES UNDER SECTION 234E IS UPHELD FOR THE PERIOD 1.06.2015 TO THE DATE OF ACTUAL FILING OF THE TDS RETURN WHICH IS 22.07.2015 AND THE BALANCE FEE SO LEVIED IS HEREBY DELETED. IN THE RESULT, THE GROUND OF APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 15. FROM PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE DECISION WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE BEFORE US IS SIMILAR TO THE ISSUE ADJUDICATED BY THE COORDINATE BENCH AND WE ACCORDINGLY HOLD THAT THE L D. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY CONFIRMED THE LEVY OF FEE U/S 23 4E OF THE ACT BY THE CPC, HOWEVER WE DIRECT THE REVENUE AUTHO RITIES TO MAKE NECESSARY VERIFICATION IN EACH OF THE CASE SO AS TO LOOK INTO THE FACT THAT IN CASE IF ANY FEE U/S 234E IS LEVIED FOR THE DELAY IN FILING RETURN FOR THE PERIOD BEFOR E 01.06.2015, THE SAME IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED AND THE REMAINING FEE LEVIED FOR THE DEFAULT COMMITTED FROM 01.06.2015 ONWARDS NEEDS TO BE CONFIRMED. 10. IN LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DECISION WHICH SQUARELY A PPLIES ON THE INSTANT APPEALS SINCE THE ISSUE AND FACTS REMAIN TH E SAME, WE ARE THUS OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS EL IGIBLE FOR RELIEF FOR ITANOS. 574 TO 579/IND/2019 MADHYA PRADESH TODAY MEDIA PVT. LTD 13 DELETION OF FEE LEVIED U/S 234E OF THE ACT AS THE R ETURNS ARE PROCESSED BEFORE 1.6.2015. 11. IN THE RESULT ALL THE 6 APPEALS OF THE ASSESSE E ARE ALLOWED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24.11.2 020. SD/- SD/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER INDORE; DATED : 24/11/2020 /DEV (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A)/ITAT (DR)/GUAR D FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INDORE