Subscribe To Our Newsletter
IMPORTANT: Please add editor@itatonline.info to your contacts to prevent mails from us going into the Spam/ Junk folder

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: January 9, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to download the file in pdf format
CITATION:

Click here to download the judgement (234E_penalty_Stay.pdf)


S. 234E: High Court grants interim stay on levy of fee for failure to file TDS statement

S. 234E of the Income-tax Act, 1961 inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 provides for levy of a fee of Rs. 200/- for each day’s delay in filing the statement of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) or Tax Collected at Source (TCS). The constitutional validity of s. 234E has been challenged in the Kerala High Court. Vide an interim order dated 18.12.2013, the High Court has admitted the Petition and granted a stay of proceedings for a period of two months.

113 Responses to “Narath Mapila LP School vs. UOI (Kerala High Court)”

  1. DEEPAK SONI says:

    The provisions of Sec 234E are not only arbitrary in nature but it is outcome of the brain of the most useless and most autocratic officers of the Govt of India who by sitting in the air conditioned offices want to harass the assessees.Let a similar fee be imposed upon the officers who show utter negligence to the repeated requests and bonafide representations made before them and who make the assessees visit their offices repeatedly for no fault of the assessees but who are not available in their chambers because they are chating and gossiping over cup of tea and are remaining non available for their personal purposes.The fees should be imposed upon them and should be recovered from hitheir coffers and not from the exchequer of the Govt.

    • ram babu B.Com says:

      These authorities does not have courage to ? the offices of the Govt. who pay TDS through Book Adjustment Entry. I am sure even to-day good no. of Govt. offices does not have AIN No.(Accounts officer Identification No.) In the absence of this they can’t file their monthly return i.e. 24G. In the absence of 24G BIN is not generated. When the BIN is not generated they can’t file. Even if they file it will be an improper 1. Whoever have Govt. Employee cleints OR whoever clients have deposits in postal dept. will know thisvery well. To the best of my knowledge there are only 7 post offices in India have AIN Nos. You know how many post offices i n India are accepting deposits and deducting TDS. When there is mismatch in BIN Nos. the dirty Income Tax Dept. instead of rejecting the file for mismatch they book provisionally. What is thevalidity of this provisional booking NO AUTHORITY IS READY TO CLARIFY.
      How many Pay and Acounts officers / DDO (drawing and disbursing officers including that of courts i. e Registrars ) are filing their quarterly returns correctly. How many of these officers are demanded to pay fees U/s 234E for their failure to file their quarterly returns in time. How many of these officers are penalised for improper filing…?
      (the intellectuals who ask to vote for a change should answer if I vote !!! change my vote can bring in the Income Tax authorities)

    • Unnikrishnan says:

      Thank you Mr Soni for the excellent comment on this barbarian provision..

    • JAY BHATT says:

      i sincerely agree with u Mr. Deepak soni

    • K Sreedhar says:

      Very Good observation Mr Soni . I am with you Sir. I have also given my view which you may like to see Sir

      K Sreedhar

    • G D Agrawal says:

      Income Tax Department – Chapra itself not filed or late filed 24Q for last 2 financial year

      • Deepak Soni says:

        The non compliance with provisions of the law is nothing new for the IncomeTax Dept.It can create all the technical and unwarranted issue in the name of the law when an assess e has to be harassed.The defaults committed by the I T Dept are just unlimited and the employees are nether bothered nor punished.When there is a question of demand every authority will harass you starting from CPC,the AO,the TRO and all but when the question of granting the refund arises the blame begins and all the officers make innocent face and makes you moving from post to pillar.The Govt Of India which shows all the powers upon innocent and ordinary citizen simply bows down before corrupt ,powerful but wrong ,and criminals and has all the credibility in the eyes of the foreign nations.

    • Satish Tandon says:

      Blaming them will not solve the problem. Challans should be made in such a way so that once the deducted amount is deposited by the deductor it should automatically free him from further formalities.

      • harshadradi says:

        CBDT should introduce TDS Challan-cum-Form No 16A for 194A etc. to avoid many problems.Tht Govt. has already made arrangement for 194-IA deductor, Why not for others ?9425517209

    • rajesh srivastava says:

      i agree with your view

  2. bhavesh says:

    Actually thing is that Central Govt Lobby Eat Food(Money) in such an huge amount and afterward when water rallied to their ass they (beggars) loot AAM ADMI By Changing law and Sections

  3. jitendra says:

    TDS deduction by the assessee is a burden to the assessee. recovery of tax is ultimaatly the responsibility of department but they have transfered to asseessee.
    as a good human being assessee deducting tax and depositing with the govt as per prescribed norm and where ever he fails to pay on time interest will be chearged to him @18% per annum .even a single day delay he has to pay 3% as interest ..
    in the democratic country like india only this type of act running.
    now due to section 234E .if assessee collected and paid tax on time but due to negligence or some other reasons he fails to file a return per day 200 Rs. penalty has to pay. in some cases assessee rely on the consultant and due to staff negligence return was not filed and asseessee didnt aware about the same and when he realised he file the return without waiting for any intimation from the department .even though has to pay 200 per day. this is totaly bad in law.
    if govt wants to suck to human blood then only this type of law survive

  4. Sanjay Thakkar says:

    Well when the challan is not paid One can’t file the TDS return. Now if the challan is delayed, there is a liability for interest and then penalty. In case of VAT, there is an option to upload the return without payment and then assessee can pay tax subsequently also. So either there is be charge of Interest or Levy of penalty. At the most if the challan is delayed, penalty should be from the date of payment of TDS.

  5. Mahesh Mathur says:

    I endorse the above view about the unlawfulness of this levy.It is the case of outsourcing without payment. Under the Constitution of India Government can not force its Citizen to do any work without payment .Even a prison who is put to work as part of punishment is paid wages. Only a Dictator or a ruler could make their slaves work without payment. What the Government is doing is unconstitutional and I am happy somebody has taken this matter to court

  6. CA Goutam Baid says:

    Merely because the provision was laid along with 234A, 234B, 234C the court hopefully will not decide the provisions of 234E mandatory and nature of levy will be held as penalty irrespective of the name given as late fee.

    But still what will be the possible outcome of the writ in my opinion that the court will order that late fee will not be imposed if there is reasonable cause and there are little probability that the entire provision be held unconstitutional. Had if such decision we have to fight as to what is reasonable cause.

  7. Jagadish Hiremath Advocate says:

    Failure to furnish return of income u/s139- Section 271 F is 5000/-, whereas late fees as narrated u/s 234E (Penalty) is Rs.200/- per day for non filing TDS return is much burden on assessee. Before giving effect to Section 234E, ie [w e f 1.7.2012], the notices were not given to the defaulters. Such type of levy of penalties are found in various taxation provisions such as Service tax, VAT etc. A minimum awareness must have been given to the tax payers at large while mandating such penalty provisions.

  8. Rajgopal says:

    If the Govt. wants to cross subsidise to gain the cheap vote bank politics one of the way to refill the its kitty is to loot the 1% (Assessees)

  9. CA H.S.UDUPA says:

    According to Section 234E(1) read with sub-section (3), Fee for belated filing of statements shl be paid before filing of returns. There is no requirement of paying the same after the statement is filed. Further, the AO is not authorized to levy such interest while processing of returns under Section 200A where he is only authorized to compute the amounts deductible under Chapter XVII and also compute interest wherever applicable and not the fee payable u/s 234E. Taking cue from this decision, other High Courts could also grant similar relief to tax payers and the ultimate outcome of decisions from different courts could only prolong the process. The law makers shd come out with some relaxation of these provisions and take a lenient stand about past statements so that lakhs of assessees are not put to undue hardship in spite of having deducted taxes at source and paid the same on time but defaulted on timely filing of returns due to various reasons.

    • Gangadharan says:

      nowadays the department is sending intimations demanding fees u/s 234E even though there is no delay in filing the quarterly statements. although the due date of filing quarterly statement for the 3rd quarter in case of government deductors is 31st January, intimations are sent for statments filed after 15th . this should be stopped

    • Gangadharan says:

      nowadays the department is sending intimations demanding fees u/s 234E even though there is no delay in filing the quarterly statements.

  10. CA Sanjay Jain says:

    The additional fee (NOT PENALTY) is not the only brainchild of the tax department. There is one more. The interest on late payment of TDS is now being computed with reference to calender month and not period wise. There is no such rule however it is being imposed . In case TDS deducted on 30.11.13 is not deposited by 7.12 13 but on 8.12.13, the interest is charged from the date of deduction 30.11.13 to 8.12.13 for 2 months ( 1 month for the calender month of november and 2nd for the calender month of December ).

    • CA SATHIAVAGEESWARAN says:

      The reason is as per section 201(1)(ii) interest is calculated at 1.5% per month or part of the month from the date of deduction of tax to the date on which it is actually paid. But when tax is deducted on the last day of the month can this be treated as part of the month. This in my view cannot be treated as part of the month. But if tax is deducted on say 29th of November then they can take a view that it part of the month. But deduction on 30th November is never a part of the month. And this is the only section in which the due date of payment looses its relevance when there is a delay. Once there is a delay it goes to the date of deduction and interest is calculated from that date. This is harsh.

    • ca Pinki Kedia says:

      Interest calculation by TDS authorities are also wrong. and I am agrees with CA Sanjay Jain. If we paid excess they are not refunding also.

  11. CA S ATHIAVAGEESWARAN says:

    The act of kerala Hugh Court is really brave. I would like more parties to join the case and fight our this arbitrary provision. The deductor is doing a service to the Government by deducting tax and paying the same to the Government. Just because there is a delay in filing returns the deductor is made to pay Rs 200 per day for each day of default. This is the only section which is charged as fee. According to Constitution experts Income Tax Act can charge only interest or penalty. It cannot charge fee. The section needs to be struck down.

  12. Kannan says:

    Hello. I received notice after notice demanding payment u/s.234E on 07th January 2014. Should I make a payment given that the Court has given interim stay? Please clarify. Thank you

  13. Jagadish Hiremath Advocate says:

    Payment of penalty is an obligatory point for no one may suggest not to make payment. U may wait and see

  14. CS VIJAYAKUMAR M P says:

    Hope section 234E will be decided as unconstitutional.
    Section 234E magical to make hard earned private money to government money.
    If government does not take steps to mitigate ………business will soon find ways to bypass TDS to a significant level.

  15. prshah says:

    Mr. Dipak soni
    What you have stated is absolutely correct. Most of our people has no courage to tell the truth. Congrats to you

  16. K Sreedhar says:

    The Section 234E is an horrible one which makes to mandatory on the part of assessees to make a delay fee in respect of delay in filing returns. The Department has an easy way to send this notice as their computer will simply churn out notices after comparing as the due date and filing date. its that simple!!!!

    Assessees go that extra mile to see that no TDS is left out [as tax audit will bring it out] and promptly remits the same along with the self calculated interest on delay in remittance of TDS if any.

    What if there is a delay in filing returns. The Department takes its own sweet time in processing the Return filed with in due date and procrastinates on the payment of Refunds. So ig the department who collects taxes in five digit crores all over india can delay the refunds which are petty amounts in few thousands why they cant punished as well? Why the department people are being left high and dry.??

    Already the assessees are hard put to calcualte the Service tax burden on Reverse mechanism which is unique in India [Receiver of Service paying service tax] .. It is adding insult to injury if the Sec-234e is forced on the honest Assessees who remit lakhs of rupees under all sections of TDS. Let us all pray that this section stuck down..

  17. Vikas Gandhi says:

    The Comment posted by Mr K Sreedhar is absolutely correct. The authority making such Rules should first think whether this will harass the Assesses. We are tax payers and not the cheaters that we need to be penalized.

    Reverse service charge mechanism shows failure/incompetence of the Govt/ Department.

    This should not be accepted.

    Jai hind

  18. NAGESH says:

    Basically one thing is not understandable from Sec. 234E. Since no one can file the return before the end of the financial year, what is the fun of levying fee for late filing, of Rs. 200 per day, if the quarterly return in not filed in time. The provision would have been, the imposition of late fee, if the TDS is not reflected in 26AS after the financial year is over and before the the due date for filing of return. TDS deposit within time is reasonable and after the deduction, if not paid before the due date, the interest is however provided. Therefore levy of late filing fee of Rs. 200 per day, if the quarterly return is not filed in time, appears to be illogical and ridiculous. Even if the quarterly return is not filed in time, there is no loss to the revenue, as the tax gets deposited along with the interest, if any. Annual statement itself will suffice, since the TDS gets reflected in 26AS, before filing of return.

    • DEEPAK SONI says:

      The greatest fun the officers are deriving from is by creating maximum harassment to the assessees. They have great pleasure if an assessee is harassed and put to difficulties and it becomes a matter of discussion when the officers gather for a cup of tea and this process of harassment goes viral and other officers pick up very fast and will put in the practice.

    • Sachinkumar says:

      I agree with Nagesh.

  19. Abdul Hameed says:

    Most irrational and arbitrary section, which penalizes the honest tax payer. You deduct the tax and pay it on time and still if the quarterly return is not filed in time by some staff, the honest tax payer is asked to pay late fee running to 50K and 60K. Do they want to kill the business and entrepreneurs? . To what extent the department can go to harass the tax payer? We need to fight against such autocratic provision till the end. Let us fight it out in the court of law.

  20. Rahul Kanodia says:

    I am looking to file a writ. Our late filing levy total is about Rs 1.8 L. An Advocate has quoted me Rs 1.5L just to file. If we can file a writ together the case will be stronger and the costs lower. Can we come together? I am in Mumbai.

  21. Prabhakar H N says:

    Govt. has started to collect hard earned money by issuing nonsense notices and threating by issuing summons. I feel only tax amount is not sufficient for scandals. now they wanted public hard earned money. They need to understand as per constitutional TDS is not a assessee job at all. it is somebody tax, assessee is collecting and paying to the Government. They should reward the honest tax payer. if things becomes serious, we should plan in such a way that even proper regular tax not reaching government.

  22. Balasubramanian s Tirunelveli says:

    The act of the Kerala High Court is a welcoming in the present situation of the ITD issuing notice demanding the late fee u/s 234E. First of of all the due date i.e 15 days from the end of each quarter is not sufficient. While uploading the TDS statement a separate challan file (downloaded from NSDL website_ has to be uploaded along with the TDS statement. The challan paid on 8.1.2014 has been reflected on 13.01.2014. The department update the challan in their website after 4 or 5days. A deductor could not file his tds return from 8.1.14 to 13.01.14 because the challan paid on 8.1.2014 was not reflected in the NSDL website. only 2 days are allowed for the deductor to file TDS return. In computerised enviournment, the challan paid in the bank has to be reflected with 2 to 4 hours as the payment is in cash (unlike book adjustment) whereas NSDL or some other Concerned takes 4 to 5days delay. Is there any panel provision under the I-T for delay in crediting the challan in TAN account. Section 234E is an undue hardship on the deductors and let us confident that section 234E will be deleted by the government soon.

  23. Ca Sanjay Jain says:

    Mr Rahul Kanodia is planning to file a writ with an expense of 1.5 Lacs . Is there any avenue available to poor citizens to file writ to point out various other such unjustified provisions , which may not be having so much revenue effect eg unjustified procedure of interest levy based on Calender month instead on the basis of period of a month.

  24. Sankaranarayanan E says:

    I have received a demand Notice. Can i wait.
    Please help

  25. BLMeena says:

    Dear Sir/ Madam, I received notice after notice demanding payment u/s.234E on 18th January 2014. Should I make a payment even that the Court has given interim stay? Please suggest. Thank you

  26. HARSHADRAI says:

    SUGGESTION; TDS is tedious but may be friedly by way of introducing TDS Challan-cum-Form No 16A for 194A etc. to avoid many problem. Name of deductee, PAN,amount,section,period ,should be added to the prasent challan.This challan is very usefull to the Income tax department as well as the deductor. BENEFITS 1. No separate issue of Form No 16A by the TDS deductor by downloading the Form No 16A from website, as all the details are available in this challan. 2. That all the information required for 26Q are already appeared in this challan hence there is no requirement of filling Form No 26Q & preperation of Form No 27A. 3. TDS deductor will save charges of upload fees, fees of authorised representative etc. 4 No difficulties in respect of getting credit of TDS. 5. That due to software or other mistakeTDS details are not appeared if 26AS & therefore TDS officers issued thousands of Notices in respect of TDS payment. This challan serve all the issues. 6. Huge workload of Income-tax Officer(TDS), Deductor & Deductee will be reduce by above challan because there will no mis-matching. 7 That Govt. has already made arrangment for 194-IA deductor,Why not for others ?. 8. Green initiative-less consumption of paper. 9425517209

  27. K.ISAAC JESUDHAS says:

    sir, sec. 234E is senseless. The deducter is doing collection of tax on behalf of the government with free of cost and the department in turn giving him a great reward of charging heavy fee U/S 234 E. Even some government departments cannot file the return in time due to thier office tight shedule. Even if the return is once in a year and having sufficient time, then it may be possible to file the return in time. The government cannot collect the tax due from the big tax payers promptly. They can only sitting inside airconditioned rooom and charge 234E fee on the poor deductors. Even in some cases the return is delayed due to the non availability of BIN from the treasury. The government should regularise the Central and State government Treasuries to issue BIN in time. To my opinion, Sec 234E is foolish and baseless.

  28. CA V.K. Khandelwal says:

    Whether any officer of IT or any department is deployed in the system for allowing the credit of TDS deducted by the various State and Central Govt Departments including Banks which are not uploaded or wrongly uploaded and not appearing in Form 26AS.

  29. CA Anil Kumar says:

    yes this sort of orbitary, un reasonable and rude provisions are enacted by those ignorant officers who does not have minimum knlowledge of ground realities. and our parlamentarions are blindly follwoing these officers. Sec 234 E should be Omited ab initio.

    • DEEPAK SONI says:

      It is expected that such arbitrary and highhandedness provisions shall be struck down as void ab initio the Honorable Courts.The Income Tax Act is becoming a legislation which is full of arbitrary provisions and they are grossly misused by the corrupt and highly arrogant officers.The computer technology should be used to spread information about such provisions in the law and about the corrupt and the arrogant officers and they should be thrown out of the system.More and more people will have to spare the time and actively join in the mass protest.Let there be awareness and courage to fight these forces .

  30. M.PRADEEP says:

    I am in the same view as Mr. Deepak Soni. Also I wish to state that not only the Govt. Officers behind this but also the politicians, especially the Finance Minister and His ministry is trying to collect the maximum money from the public in any way they can. This Higher Officials are only concentrated in collecting the money from the public but they never interested in giving or issuing the refund due to the asessees. Even they issuing Notices to the assessees for taxes already paid. Now a days they have the option to take the tax credit from the Assessees Account (26as), but for every officers are sending unnecessary Notices to the assessees and asking them to produce the tax paid challan. This is only for giving trouble to the general public. They will give credit for TDS only if it is available in 26AS. But if the assessee has paid self asst. tax or advance tax, they never take it from the assesses account, and issuing notices to the assessee to produce evidence of the payment. At least now all are to react against this system and to reduce the burden of the public. I wish to say that the Penalty u/s 234e for delay in TDS Return filing is a utter rubbish. This is too much. Then the public has to levy Penalty for delay in issuing refund against the Income tax department.

  31. A SENTHIL says:

    In this situation I want to share my view also. TDS is deducted for the help of Government and ETDS work and Charges are bourned by the Deductor for this ETDS work. So the ultimate beneficiaries are, the Central Govt and Deductees. If Penalty u/s 234E imposed on the default by the deductor, he further suffered. So Incometax Department must see this fact and kindly remove or postpone the penalty u/s 234E and first properly inform and educate the Deductors in this regard. Because TDS Money properly deposited to the central govt, and only ETDS retruns are delayed. Further there is acceptable shortage in ETDS return preparers and filers also. This is because of low income and high tension work on ETDS. All are causes for delay in ETDS filing. So deductors strongly oppose penalty u/s 234E and Department must reconsider their penalty u/s 234E and may postpone the same. In the same time the Deductors must understand the problems of No-filing of ETDS returns. Because there must be a acceptable rule to file the ETDS returns. Deductors must realize their important part of work in this regard and must take due care to file ETDS in time. Particularly the Government Deductors must give due attention in this regard.

    • muthu says:

      govt will accept paper return and then impose u/s 234e

      • HARSHADRAI says:

        IF THE GOVT./CBDT SHOULD INTRODUCE TDS CHALLAN CUM FORM NO 16A THEN THEREWILL BE NO PROBLEM. GOVT HAS ALREADY MADE ARRANGEMENT FOR 194-IA DEDUCTOR. WHY NOT FOR OTHERS ? NO DOWNLOADING OF FORM NO 16A FROM WEBSITE. MANY DEDUCTEE PAID THE TDS IN TIME THIS LEVY/FEES IS ILLEGAL. 9425517209

  32. JItendra Khalpada says:

    Late Fees levied on Deductors are nothing but a unjust enrichment of the Govt. on behalf of poor Deductors who collects Tax from small contractors/sub-contractors who were hitherto out of the reach of Govt. It is we deductors beacause of whom the Govt Can collects Thousands of Crores Ruppes of Tax Revenue each year even before the Completion of the FY.

    Today the situation is that a small business man have to first worry about the compliance/non-compliance of TDS & spent lac of Rupees on the complete infrastructure to avoid any default of TDS Laws.e.g. Busying software/hire professionals/ emply competent staff who are conversant with TDS Rules. Pay filing fees every quarter etc.

    Why the Deductor should incurr addiotnal cost to help Govt. to collect the Tax from a common men? .

    Even after depositing the deducted Tax on time to Govt. If he delays in filing the Return Rs.200/- Per day Late fees is imposed U/s 234E inspite of the delay never result loss to Govt. in financial way. This is shocking.

    As far as Income Tax Return is concerened When We do not have Tax Liability & we delays filing of Return even Section 234A Interest is not levible on us then why the similar previledge is not available in case of section 234E. It should be imposed only on those who deducts TDS but avoids timely depositing the same to Govt. A/c & enjoys undue credit of the Funds.

    So please contribute , come forward & make a huge chain of comments to enable the Govt. to relax the conditions for charging Late fees U/s 234E.

    Regds,
    CA JItendra Khalpada.

  33. Raju says:

    We can a start an online petition on change.org where all can sign their objection. This message should be spread across the country thro various social media so that all can sign

  34. Rahul Kanodia says:

    Please start the petition – I will sign the objection

    • X.THOMAS ANTONY says:

      Please start the petition – I will sign the objection. Please note that S.T.Hindu College of Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District is an Govt. aided College. The salary to staffs were paid through Treasury at Nagercoil upon the sanction of Joint Director General Office at Tirunelveli. There was a dispute there that who would file the Form 24G. At Last The JD office BIN No is was viewed through NSDL site using thier TAN. Under the presumption of these BINs are pertainig to all Govt aided college of the particular region, the TDS Quarterly returns are filed with inorbitant delay. Now the orders were passed to pay the Entire Salary amount as SHORT PAYMENT and charge INTEREST for this Short Payment inaddion to the charging of Huge sum as 234(E) Interest. The demand comes around more than Rs.150 Lakhs. What is the Logic. In this case Deductor is not the S.T.Hindu College but it is now subjected to pay the huge money ude to the defective software govt programme. Kindly look into this one sample and we need Govt. interefearance to solve this problem and either abolish or postpone the implementation of Sec. 234E and other hardships

      • Balasubramanian Tirunelveli says:

        Dear sir

        This is not due to the software of the department. The real problem is between the treasury office and the incometax department. By solving this, you can get credit of your TDS payment. Anyway fees u/s 234E is worst in law and should be removed

  35. S.Sivaraman, Tirunelveli says:

    Late fee U/S 234 E is very poor section to poor(small) deductors. very socked All over indians, government department drawing officers was freezed, So,deductors strongly oppose penalty u/s 234E.

  36. B N VENKATARAMU says:

    sir

    it is very very bad move by the CBDT to levy 234E penalty ( for acting as GOVT agent) for delay in filing the eTDS return on assessees and same should be withdrawn by the CBDT hope kerala govt granted 2 month stay will become permanent.

    equally CBDT also should be for their lapse in providing the e services

    rgds

    • muthu says:

      u/s 234e is unreasonable it may be erase or postponed some time. they are not inform this type of law has made, only we file the e-tds after onwards inform the about u/s234e. So my suggestion is one or two years notice to all in this regard and then leavy u/s234e.

      • HARSHADRAI says:

        CBDT SHOULD INTRODUCE TDS challan-cum-Form No 16A. In the erra of technology CBDT can do it. No need to file Form No 26Q. No mismatching. Tht Govt. has already made arrangement for 194-IA deductor. Why not for others?

  37. i think that the levy of late fees u/s 234E is only a one way traffic. the bonafide tax payer is always punished for delay in compliance. the govt departments are always a exempted category. there is no compliance what so ever for the govt departments. delay in refunds are always cleared after along time no late fees are paid to the tax payer @ Rs.200/- per day over and above the interest. this late fees nothing but a additional source of revenue to the govt from the tax payers. the govt can make rules but these rules should not harass the tax payer in this way in the welfare state. the interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C is levied on the unpaid part of the tax due on self assessment. however 234E late fees are only for filing TDS returns. also the action of the govt in charging the late fees u/s 234E for quarter ending jun , sep and december has no basis at all. the justification for late fees u/s 234E is always given as the tax payers who have claimed tax credit would be deprived of the tax credit if the TDS return is not filed in time. however which category of tax payer if filing income tax return on quarterly basis? there is no justification atall for levying late for late filing of TDS return on quarterly basis. however the logic and the govt actions are always at cross roads so the courts only has to take initiative in path breaking and decisive judgements as an eye opener to the insensitive govt .

  38. Rajesh says:

    Is there any update on this case as 2 months has expired on 17 Feb 2014?

  39. KIRAN HAANSORA says:

    no updation till date received……so wt we can do…?in which site the result of the same is published…????

  40. NIRANJANA says:

    Govt. should not harass people. Deletion of section 234E is mandatory from 01.07.2012. TDS Return filling due dates should be increased to another one month for all quarterly returns respectively by which all the duductors will be able to file the returns correctly. There is not sufficient upload centres in India. Now, some centres are telling as ‘link failure’. Electrical problem and poor internet connectivity service is another problem. Sometimes people are suffering from cyclone & flood and other natural calamities. BIN no. and BIN amount mismatch is another cause. Therefore, I do request to the Govt to give kind attention to the above mentioned factors.

  41. M Rama Rao,LLB says:

    Dear Friend the Income tax Department is already collected tax on due time or the assesses is deposited tax by timely on his Tan but Quarterly return filling is late due so many different reaction from assesses side,nsdl side,consultancy side but here main point is the I.TAX Department side no revenue loss Because the assesses is deposited tax timely but the cleark ,ddo, or responsible person is busy in his official work then the quarterly return is filled lately,then i request to the Hon’ble H.Court Chief judge give decisions in favor of assessee

  42. PRADEEP A K says:

    DEAR ALL, THE LATE FILING FEE IS NOT A SOLUTION FOR FILING IT INTIME ETDS RETURNS QLY BY THE DEDUCTORS, BUT IT IS AGAIN DISTRACTING THE DEDUCTOR FROM FILING ETDS. ACTUALLY THERE MUST NOT BE ANY PENALTY NOR LATE FILING FEE BY THE I T DEPT FOR ETDS QLY RETURNS AND THERE IS ONE MORE THING COMING UP, PROBABLY NOT HEARD BY ANYBODY AS I SAW ALL THE COMMENTS, THAT NOT DOWNLOADING THE F-16A FORMS WITH DUE DATE ALSO PENALISABLE FOR RS.100 PER DAY. MEANS DEPT DOES NOT WANT THE PEOPLE TO OTHER JOBS THAN INCOMETAX MATTERS/ETDS JOBS. VER VERY VERY VERY RIDICULOUS AND HARD SECTION INTRODUCED BY THE DEPT. THERE MUST NOT BE ANY LATE FEE/PENALTY FOR LATE FILING OF THE ETDS RETURNS,NON MENTIONING OF DEDUCTEE/EMPLOYEE PAN IN THE RETURNS,AND MISMATCH OF THE CHALLAN DUE TO WRONG FEEDING OF TAN/AY BY BANK EMPLOYEES. AS THERE IS NO ACTION OF BANK FOR ENTERING WRONG TAN BY BANK(AND STILL BANK PEOPLE WANT MORE PAY HIKE FOR WHICH THEY ARE GOING ON STRIKE STILL,BUT NOT DOING CORRECT JOB). I THINK I T DEPT MUST QUESTIONED AS TO HOW MANY OF THERE OFFICERS HAVE GOT DEPT NOTICES AND PENALISED THEIR EMPLOYEES.
    AT LAST THIS SECTION 234E HAS TO BE DELETED AB INITIO ALONG WITH INTEREST ON LATE PAYMENT TOO.

  43. B N VENKATARAMU says:

    I THINK 234E IS A BURDEN ON THE BONAFIDE TAX PAYER
    GOVT SHOULD THINK AND DELETE THE SECTION
    AND GOVT SHOULD NOT SQUEEZE THE EXISTING TAX PAYERS
    BY INSERTING ADDITONALL SECTION TO INCREASE THE REVENUE TO EXCHEQER
    SHOULD THINK OTHER AREAS WHERE IN REVENUE TO THE GOVT CAN BE INCREASED

    RGDS

  44. Avinash says:

    Hello. I received notice after notice demanding payment u/s.234E on 07th January 2014. Should I make a payment given that the Court has given interim stay? Please clarify. Thank you

    • Mahendra Soni says:

      The stay order issued by Hon’ble Kerala High Court is applicable only to the state of Kerala, the tax officer of your territory may take a view that since the order of the HC does not apply to his jurisdiction, hence you may be required to remit the demand raised u/s 234E. If the demand amount is considerably high, it is advisable to file a petition in the high court of your jurisdiction

  45. Bhagat Avinash, Pune says:

    Hello. I received notice after notice demanding payment u/s.234E on 07th January 2014. Should I make a payment given that the Court has given interim stay? Please clarify. Thank you two month wait ?

  46. NIRANJAN says:

    2 MONTHS OVER CAN ANY ONE TELL THE CURRENT SITUATION

  47. CA. Amit Kadam says:

    any update from kerala govt or any other govt on this matter. kindly circulate the same to forum

  48. B N VENKATARAMU says:

    234E STAY IS APPLICABLE ONLY TO KERALA STATE
    OR APPLICABLE TO WHOLE OF INDIA
    BECAUSE 2 MONTHS OVER AND STILL
    WE ARE GETTING 234E DEMAND NOTICE ASKING US TO PAY THE PENALTY

    RGDS

  49. Advocate- Ashok Kr Sharma says:

    Section 243E for delay filing of TDS/TCS Return very-very ridiculous and unjustified.In fact govt.is working in very selfish manner and sucking the blood of the people,the motive of the govt official is to harass the people and make money through such type of penalties.The concept of the deptt. has been fully changed,and now a days penalty clauses in the
    various laws has become the source of Income.

  50. Advocate -Ashok kr Sharma says:

    comment posted on 28/02/2014 At 04.31 pm. pls Read as Section 234E.typing error corrected.

  51. The act clearly states that the assessees are collecting TDS on behalf of the govt. That means the assessees are performing a task favouring the govt besides paying corporation & dividend taxes. Having deducted tax & if not paid attracts penal provisions including interest, perfectly fine, however having paid & a mere delay in reporting & downloading form 16/16A from the complex nsdl website is simply ridiculous. Instead of patting us assessees on our backs for doing a govt task we are in fact being taken to task by them.

    • harshadrai says:

      DEDUCTOR IS UNPAID SERVANT OF CENTRAL GOVT. IF CBDT INTRODUCE TDS CHALLAN CUM FORM NO 16A THEN THERE WILL NO HURDEL. PRESENT CHALLAN SHALL BE MODIFIED. CBDT ALREADY INTRODUCE THIS CHALLAN IN CASE OF REALESTATE TRANSACTION. OTHER DEDUCTOR PELALISED BY THE GOVT. SAMARATH KO NA DOSH GOSAI. BUT WE SHOULD UNITE & FIGHT AGAIST THIS EVIL. BJP SHOULD COME FORWARD & DECLARE THAT ALL UNWANTED LAW & SECTION SHALL BE ABOLISH.

  52. jayesh Soni says:

    The Matter of TDS is first of all the deductor is working on behalf of Govt. for collecting the tax & paying. though this is a duty of the department to collect tax through getting filing of IT returns. Although the person who is working as an agent for Govt. Honorary as collector or deductor of tax he is basically penalised not the person for whome the tax is going deducted. the question of hardship of filing of TDS return may be compare with filing of the Income tax return. the department & the Govt should consider the prectical prpblems of the assessee before taking the step of demand & vacate the section 234E so initated.

  53. Niranjana Pradhan Cuttack Odisha says:

    Dear All, Please download CBDT CIRCULAR NO 07 OF 2014

  54. B N VENKATARAMU says:

    RECENTRLY GOVT EXTENDED THE FILING ONLY TO GOVT DEDUCTORS

    BY SHOWING DOUBLE STANDARD ACT LEFT THE PRIVATE DEDUCTORS

    GOVT SHOULD RE THINK AND EXTEND THE TIME TO ALL THE DEDUCTORS

    RGDS

    • muthu says:

      yes govt should treat all off them are equal

      • Harshadrai says:

        If CBDT introduce TDS Challan cum Form No 16A, after modifying present challan, all problem will be solved.No requirement to file TDS return as all details are available in this challan. No mismatch. CBDT already introduce challan in respect of 164LA why not for others?

  55. CA Kanwaljit Singh Dhunna says:

    Dear All,

    Has anyone of you filed any petition against 234E ?
    I am thinking of creating a common fund to meet expenses of litigation for any such issues. Want to know if there is any such existing fund at present or any NGO for such purposes ?
    Would like to invite comments from all of you on such fund ?

  56. m says:

    already 2 case pending against u/s 234E it will relief us

  57. BLMeena says:

    Dear Friends, Please download CBDT CIRCULAR NO 07 OF 2014

  58. HARSHADRAI says:

    Circular No. 7 applicable to Govt. deductor only. No relief to other deductors

  59. dasthigeer says:

    in respect of govt deductar who is to pay

  60. dasthigeer says:

    with regard to penalty in late filing in case of govt office consisting several staff and officers who is to pay this penalty?

  61. B N VENKATARAMU says:

    SIR

    ARE WE GETTING ANY RELIEF FROM 234E FOR LATE FILING
    OR IT IS STILL A STAY AT COURT
    WHAT NEXT?
    GOVT SHOULD RE THINK AND EXTEND THE DUE DATE ALL THE DEDUCTORS
    RGDS

  62. THEVARKONDA SAMBASIVIAH SURESH says:

    pls notify me of new posts by email

  63. Yagnik Sojitra says:

    The Government Bodies have been given the extended validity till 31.03.2014. Then why should the other assessee’s not getting any extension in the time limit to file their TDS returns ? Its not fair to the other assessees.

    • harshadradi says:

      SAMRATH KO NA DOSH GOSAI. If CBDT introduce TDS CHALLAN-CUM-FORM NO16A FOR 194 A etc deductor then all the problem will be solved. The CBDT has already made arrangement for 194-IA deductor, Why not for others?9425517209

  64. Adv K R Singh says:

    Dear friends, there is no accountability process for the corrupt officials who play role to collect the revenue and for their own tijori like intermediaries and karinda of jamindari system. The orders of revenue authorities reveal that these haves not been passed with due care and caution, which paves the way to constitute absence of good faith u/s 52 IPC. The Govt. or officer may be prosecuted for the act not done in good faith or not intended to be done in good faith. So movement in this direction may work and be proved to correct the corrupt.

  65. Section 234 E is itself illegal in its frame and legislation. A fees is always chargeable for an application by which applicant request authority to consider it to grant some right, licenses etc. and if application is filed after a stipulated time, late fees is required. This section has been put under chapter XVII Collection and Recovery of Tax with head -G fees for default in furnishing returns where as default renders application of penalty. This section is to suck the blood of the tax deductor who discharge the shifted liability of revenue. That instead of paying some incentive or proportionally tax relief to tax deductor, they are enforced to pay extra money under unauthorized various head.

    • harshadradi says:

      All India Federation of Tax Practioner,ASSOCHAM,Chamber of Commerce,Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, Confederation of Indian Industry etc. should file write petition.

      • Kanwaljit says:

        Indeed a Collective Effort is required from everyone effected. Till now 4 writ petitions have been filed against this in Kerala, Karnataka, Rajasthan and Maharashtra High Courts. Anyone concerned in Punjab may please contact me at 9876739911 if they intend to join forces for a common writ petition against 234E.

      • rajesh srivastava says:

        very good effort

Leave a Reply

Current ye@r *


If you are a tax professional, you must sign up for our free newsletter. Why? Because we keep you informed about the latest developments in the world of tax. We focus only on the most important must-read judgements & articles that will impact your day-to-day professional work. You can see a chronological listing of all our postings on twitter & facebook


IMPORTANT: After signing up & clicking on the confirmation mail, send a test/ blank mail to editor@itatonline.info. Why? Because it is the easiest way to add our email address to your address/ contacts book and ensure that our Newsletter does not get sent to the Spam/ Junk folder


Email



Unsubscribe