BMG Calcuttawala Jewellers Private Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Indore)
234E Late Fee Deleted for Pre-01.06.2015 Period: Conflicting HC Views- Apply Vegetable Products Rule -ITAT Follows Favourable View
Assessee filed TDS statement in Form 24Q for Q4 of FY 2012-13 on 13.12.2013. CPC processed the statement u/s 200A on 09.03.2021 & raised total demand of ₹64,417 comprising late fee of ₹40,231 u/s 234E & interest of ₹24,186 u/s 220(2). CIT(A) confirmed levy of late fee. Before Tribunal, assessee argued that for AY 2013-14, i.e., for defaults prior to 01.06.2015, section 200A did not empower CPC to levy late fee u/s 234E, & relied on ITAT Indore decision in Parasmal Parakh (2022) 31 ITJ Online 550 & several other Tribunal rulings following the Karnataka High Court decision in Fatehraj Singhvi.
Tribunal examined legislative history & judicial developments, specifically noting that the enabling provision for adjusting 234E fee during processing—section 200A(1)(c)—was inserted only w.e.f. 01.06.2015. Tribunal reproduced its own earlier decisions holding that for periods prior to 01.06.2015, CPC could not levy 234E fee while issuing intimation u/s 200A. It also considered conflicting High Court decisions: Gujarat HC in Rajesh Kourani upheld levy, whereas Karnataka HC in Fatehraj Singhvi held levy impermissible. Since there is no jurisdictional Madhya Pradesh High Court ruling, Tribunal applied the Supreme Court principle in Vegetable Products Ltd that where two views exist, the view favouring the assessee must prevail.
