Tranz India Corporation Coimbatore v. Ito Tds Ward Coimbatore

In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal B Bench Chennai Before Shri Abraham P George Accountant Member And Shri George Mathan Judicial Member Ita Nos 2421 To 2425 Mds 2017 Assessment Year 2014 15 M S Tranz India Corporation 204 2 Nd Floor Sanjay Raaj Towers 100 Feet Road Tatabad Coimbatore 641 012 Vs The Income Tax Officer Tds Ward 1510 Mayflower Midcity Trichy Road Coimbatore Pan Aafft 2020 A Appellant Respondent Ita Nos 2470 To 2475 Mds 2017 Assessment Year 2013 14 Smt Ramachandran Vichithra 189 239 Perur Main Road Kumarapalayam Post Coimbatore 641 026 Vs The Income Tax Officer Tds Ward 1510 Mayflower Midcity Trichy Road Coimbatore Pan Afjpr 2252 R Appellant Respondent Ita No 2463 Mds 2017 Assessment Year 2013 14 M S Cr Associates 4 2 A Chinna Neeli Thoppu Siruvani Road Arai Thotti Theethipalaym Post Coimbatore 641 010 Vs The Income Tax Officer Tds Ward 1510 Mayflower Midcity Trichy Road Coimbatore Pan Aaffc 3732 J Appellant Respondent Ita Nos 2421 2425 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2470 2475 Mds 2017 Ita No 2463 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2464 2465 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2466 2467 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2468 2469 Mds 2017 2 Ita Nos 2464 2465 Mds 2017 Assessment Year 2013 14 M S K R Healthcare P Ltd 93 F K R Hospital Mettupalayam Road Periyanaickenpalayam Coimbatore 641 020 Vs The Income Tax Officer Tds Ward 1510 Mayflower Midcity Trichy Road Coimbatore Pan Aabck 9628 A Appellant Respondent Ita Nos 2466 2467 Mds 2017 Assessment Year 2013 14 M S K R Pharmacy 93 F K R Hospital Mettupalayam Road Periyanaickenpalayam Coimbatore 641 020 Vs The Income Tax Officer Tds Ward 1510 Mayflower Midcity Trichy Road Coimbatore Pan Aa Efk 7710 K Appellant Respondent Ita Nos 2468 2469 Mds 2017 Assessment Year 2013 14 Shri R V Ramachandran 189 239 Perur Main Road Kumarapalayam Post Coimbatore 641 026 Vs The Income Tax Officer Tds Ward 1510 Mayflower Midcity Trichy Road Coimbatore Pan A Fjpr 2246 D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Mr S Sridhar Adv Respondent By Mr S Natarajan Jcit Date Of Hearing 21 12 2017 Date Of Pronouncement 21 12 2017 Ita Nos 2421 2425 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2470 2475 Mds 2017 Ita No 2463 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2464 2465 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2466 2467 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2468 2469 Mds 2017 3 O R D E R Per Bench Ita Nos 2421 2422 2423 2424 2425 Mds 2017 Ar E The Appeals Filed By The Assessee M S Tranz India Corporation Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals 2 Coimbatore In Ita No 23 16 17 Ita No 22 16 17 Ita No 19 16 17 Ita No 20 16 17 Ita No 21 16 17 Respectively Dated 31 07 2017 For The Ay 2014 15 2 Ita Nos 2470 2471 2472 2473 2474 2475 Mds 2017 Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Smt Ramachandran Vich Ithra Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals 2 Coimbatore In Ita No 07 16 17 Ita No 08 16 17 Ita No 09 16 17 Ita No 10 16 17 Ita No 11 16 17 Ita No 12 16 17 Respectively Dated 31 07 2017 For The Ay 2013 14 3 Ita No 2463 Mds 2017 Is An Appeal Filed By The A Ssessee M S Cr Associates Against The Order Of The Commissioner O F Income Tax Appeals 2 Coimbatore In Ita No 33 16 17 Dated 3 0 08 2017 For The Ay 2013 14 4 Ita Nos 2464 2465 Mds 2017 Are The Appeals Fil Ed By The Assessee M S K R Healthcare P Ltd Against The O Rder Of The Ita Nos 2421 2425 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2470 2475 Mds 2017 Ita No 2463 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2464 2465 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2466 2467 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2468 2469 Mds 2017 4 Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals 2 Coimbatore In Ita No 76 16 17 Ita No 75 16 17 Dated 31 07 2017 For The Ay 20 13 14 5 Ita Nos 2466 2467 Mds 2017 Are The Appeals Fil Ed By The Assessee M S K R Pharmacy Against The Order Of Th E Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals 2 Coimbatore In Ita No 73 16 17 Ita No 74 16 17 Dated 31 07 2017 For The Ay 2013 14 6 Ita Nos 2468 2469 Mds 2017 Are The Appeals Fil Ed By The Assessee Shri R V Ramachandran Against The Order O F The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals 2 Coimbatore In Ita No 05 16 17 Ita No 06 16 17 Dated 31 07 2017 For The Ay 2013 14 7 As All The Appeals Are On Identical Issues And T Hey Are Disposed Off By This Common Order 8 Shri S N Natarajan Jcit Represented On Behalf O F The Revenue And Shri S Sridhar Adv Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee 9 It Was Submitted By The Ld Ar That All The Appea Ls Were Against The Levy Of Late Filing Fee In Respect Of The Quarterly Tds Settlements It Was A Submission That The Late Filing Fee Has Been Levied U S 234 E Of The It Act Ita Nos 2421 2425 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2470 2475 Mds 2017 Ita No 2463 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2464 2465 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2466 2467 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2468 2469 Mds 2017 5 It Was A Submission That The Quarterly Tds Statemen Ts Had Been Filed Admittedly Beyond The Time Limit Prescribed Under The Act And The Same To Be Processed By The Cpc Tds Ghaziabad U S 200 A Wherein The Late Filing Fee U S 234 E Was Levied And Demanded From Th E Assessee It Was A Submission That Aggrieved With The Levy The Assess Ees Had Filed The Appeals Before The Ld Cit A Who Had Deleted The Sa Me By Following The Decision Of The Itat Chennai Benches In The Case Of Smt G Indrani And Others In Ita Nos 1019 To 1021 Mds 2015 Dated 10 07 2015 Wherein It Had Been Held That Prior To 01 06 2015 There Was N O Enabling Provision In Sec 200 A For Making Such Adjustment Of Levying Fees U S 234 E And Accordingly Set Aside The Intimations U S 200 A Issu Ed In Those Cases It Was A Submission That However While Doing So Itat Held That It Was Open To The Ao To Pass Separate Orders U S 234 E Of The A Ct For Levying This Fee In Accordance With Law In Consonance With These O Bservations Of The Itat The Ld Cit A Had Also Made A Remark While De Leting The Demand Of Fee U S 234 E Raised Through The Intimation U S 200 A That The Ao Is At Liberty To Pass Separate Order For Levying Fee U S 234 E As Per Provisions Of Law It Was A Submission That Consequently The Ao Had Levied The Fee U S 234 E By Passing The Relevant Orders Dated 28 03 2016 However The Ao Has Not Specified The Provision Under Which He H As Been Enabled To Pass The Order Levying Fee U S 234 E Of The Act It Was A Submission That The Levy Of Fee U S 234 E May Be Made Only In The En Abling Order Passed Ita Nos 2421 2425 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2470 2475 Mds 2017 Ita No 2463 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2464 2465 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2466 2467 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2468 2469 Mds 2017 6 U S 200 A And As It Had Been Rightly Held That There Was No Enabling Provision In Sec 200 A Prior To 01 06 2015 For Such Adjustment Of The Levy Of Fee U S 234 E The Levy Of Fee As Made By The Ao Was Liable To Be Deleted 10 In Reply The Ld Dr Vehemently Supported The Or Der Of The Ao And The Ld Cit A It Was Submitted By The Ld Ar That The Ld Cit A When Adjudicating The Issue Had Followed The Decision Of The Honble Gujarat High Court In The Case Of Rajesh Kourani V Union B Ank Of India Reported In 2017 83 Taxmann Com 137 To Hold That As The Qu Estion As To Whether The Levy Of Fee U S 234 E Can Be Levied Otherwise Th Rough An Intimation U S 200 A Was Not Dealt With By The Honble Karnatak A High Court In The Case Of Fatheraj Singhvi V Union Bank Of India Rep Orted In 2016 73 Taxmann Com 252 11 We Have Considered The Rival Submissions Once The Assessees File Their Quarterly Tds Statements In Form No 26 Q Then The Same Is To Be Processed U S 200 A This Is Because Of The Words Of Sec 200 A I Is Where A Statement Tax Deduction At Source Or Corre Ction Statement Had Been Made By Deducting Any Sum U S 200 Such Statem Ent Shall Be Processed In The Following Manner The Late Fee H As Been Provided In Sec 234 E Sec 234 E Provides For The Computation Of The Late Fee A Late Ita Nos 2421 2425 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2470 2475 Mds 2017 Ita No 2463 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2464 2465 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2466 2467 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2468 2469 Mds 2017 7 Fee Computed U S 234 E Can Be Levied Only On The Pro Cessing Of The Statements Of The Tax Deducted At Source U S 200 A I N So Far As Sec 200 A 1 C Provides For Such Late Fee To Be Inc Luded In The Processing Thus It Becomes Clear That No Order U S 234 E Can B E Passed Independently The Late Fee Can Be Levied Only Aft Er Processing The Tds Statements Furnished This Being So We Are Of The View That The Levy Of Interest U S 234 E In The Order Dated 28 03 2016 As Made By The Ao And As Confirmed By The Ld Cit A Is Unsustainable And Consequently Stands Deleted 12 In The Result The Appeals Filed By The Assesse Es In Ita Nos 2421 To 2425 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2470 2475 Mds 2017 Ita No 2 463 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2464 2465 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2466 2467 M Ds 2017 And Ita Nos 2468 2469 Mds 2017 Stand Allowed Order Pronounced In The Open Court On December 21 2017 At Chennai Sd Sd Abraham P George Accountant Member George Mathan Judicial Member Ita Nos 2421 2425 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2470 2475 Mds 2017 Ita No 2463 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2464 2465 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2466 2467 Mds 2017 Ita Nos 2468 2469 Mds 2017 8 Chennai 2 Dated December 21 2017 Tln 34 54 Copy To 1 Appellant 4 6 Cit 2 Respondent 5 4 Dr 3 6 Cit A 6 Gf