Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Shri Uttam Chand Gangwal Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 764/JP/2017
Date of Judgement/Order : 23/01/2019
Related Assessment Year : 2015-16
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Shri Uttam Chand Gangwal Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur)

In the instant case, the assessee filed its TDS return in Form No. 26Q for the quarter ended 31stMarch, 2015 on 22nd July, 2015 and the same was processed and an intimation dated 30 July, 2015 was issued by the AO u/s 200A of the Act. Thus, both the filing of the return of income by the assessee and processing thereof has happened much after 1.6.2015 i.e, the date of assumption of jurisdiction by the AO u/s 200A(1)(C) to levy fees under section 234E of the Act.

Even though the quarterly return pertains to quarter ended 31.03.2015, the fact remains that there is a continuing default even after 1.6.2015 and the return was actually filed on 22.07.2015.

The said provisions cannot be read to say that where 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 will suffer the levy of fees, however, an assessee who has delayed the filing 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 continuous default on his part even after 1.6.2015.

In our view, the AO has acquired the jurisdiction to levy the fees as on 1.06.2015 and 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.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

One Comment

  1. RAJEEV KUMAR INANI says:

    I have a Query: When the Intimation u/s 200A and Late fees u/s 234E is made appellable, is it not injustice to Reject all the appeals stating that after 1/6/15 the Levy is justified ?

    If the intention of law / appellate authorities is clear for rejecting all such appeals, why this is made appellable, it should be strictly made non appellable in Income tax act itself ?

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031