SHRI SHIVAJI COLLEGE,PARBHANI vs. ACIT CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL -TDS, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1742/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 August 20265 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that late fee under Section 234E cannot be levied for periods prior to June 1, 2015, as Section 200A was amended to allow such levy only from that date. Therefore, the levy in this case was bad-in-law.

What were the facts?

The assessee was levied a late fee of Rs. 37,800 under Section 234E read with Section 200A for the first quarter of AY 2014-15. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed.

What were the issues?

Whether late fee under Section 234E is leviable for TDS statements pertaining to periods before June 1, 2015, when Section 200A was amended to include this provision.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 200A,Section 234E

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Shubham N Rathi (virtual)
For Respondent: Shri Sandeep Sathe, JCIT

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1742/PUN/2026 Assessment year : 2014-15 Shri Shivaji College ACIT, CPC Cell-TDS, Basmat Road, Parbhani – 431401 Vs. Aurangabad Maharashtra PAN: AABTM0727H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Shubham N Rathi (virtual) Department by : Shri Sandeep Sathe, JCIT Date of hearing : 29-07-2026 Date of pronouncement : 12-08-2026

O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.02.2026 of the Ld. Addl / JCIT(A)-1, Coimbatore relating to assessment year 2014-15.

2.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the ACIT (CPC), Ghaziabad has raised demand of Rs.37,800/- under the provisions of section 200A(c) r.w.s. 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Quarter 1 of assessment year 2014-15. In appeal, the Ld. Addl / JCIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

2 ITA No.1742/PUN/2026

3.

Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. Addl / JCIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ["the Ld. CIT(A)”] has erred in affirming the order u/s 154 read with section 200A of the Income- tax Act, 1961 ["the Act"] and confirming the levy of late fees of Rs.37,800/- u/s 234E of the Act in the intimation generated u/s 200A passed in respect of TDS statement filed in Form 26Q for Quarter I of A.Y. 2014-15 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that in respect of the TDS statements filed for the period prior to 01.06.2015, the late fee u/s 234E could not have been levied in the intimation order u/s 200A and hence, the levy of late fee in respect of the TDS statement filed for A.Y. 2014-15 (Q1) was not justified and deserves to be deleted. 3. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, delete or substitute any of the above grounds of appeal.

4.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in various cases has held that late fee u/s 234E is applicable w.e.f. 01.06.2015. In the present case of the assessee, Department has levied late fee u/s 234E for the Quarter 1 of assessment year 2014-15 which is not sustainable when the order u/s 154 r.w.s. 200A of the Act was itself passed on 14.03.2014.

5.

The Ld. DR on the other hand relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. Addl / JCIT(A).

6.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. The only issue involved in this case is whether late fee under section 234E can be levied for F.Y.2013-14. We find that the impugned issue is covered in favour of the assessee by various decisions of the Hon’ble High Court(s) and Coordinate Bench(es) of the Tribunal. We find the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs.

3 ITA No.1742/PUN/2026

Union of India 289 CTR 0602 (Kar) has decided this issue in favour of assessee by observing as under :

“23. In view of the aforesaid observation and discussion, since the impugned intimation given by the respondent-Department against all the appellants under Section 200A are so far as they are for the period prior to 1.6.2015 can be said as without any authority under law. Hence, the same can be said as illegal and invalid. 24. ………………..In view of the reasons recorded by us hereinabove, when the amendment made under Section 200A of the Act which has come into effect on 1.6.2015 is held to be having prospective effect, no computation of fee for the demand or the intimation for the fee under Section 234E could be made for the TDS deducted for the respective assessment year prior to 1.6.2015. Hence, the demand notices under Section 200A by the respondent-authority for intimation for payment of fee under Section 234E can be said as without any authority of law and the same are quashed and set aside to that extent.”

7.

The decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court was followed by the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. vs. Union of India [2022] 134 taxmann.com 111 (Kerala).

8.

The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Lingeshwara Creations Vs. PCIT [2024] 168 taxmann.com 383 has held as under :

“In the present case, the respondent had imposed the late fee only under Section 234E of the Act for the assessment years 2012-2013, 2013-2014. However, Section 200A of the Act was not introduced during the said assessment years and it was introduced only with effect from 01.06.2015. Therefore, in the absence of any provisions under Section 200A of the Act, the respondents ought not to have imposed late fee under Section 234E while processing the applications for TDS under Section 200A. Hence, in such view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned Demand Intimation Letters are liable to be set aside.”

9.

We find in the instant case late fee under section 234E has been levied for F.Y.2013-14. Undisputedly the assessee filed TDS return before 01.06.2015. The order u/s 154 r.w.s. 200A of the Act was passed on 14.03.2014 and hence it

4 ITA No.1742/PUN/2026

pertains to period prior to 01.06.2015. Therefore, respectfully following the decisions cited (supra) we hold that late fee levied under section 234E in the case of the assessee for the 1st Quarter of A.Y. 2014-15 pertaining to the period prior to 01.06.2015 is bad-in-law. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the late fee levied under section 234E of the Act. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed.

10.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 12th August, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (R. K. PANDA) (ASTHA CHANDRA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 12th August, 2026 GCVSR Gajjala Chinna Digitally signed by Gajjala Chinna Venkata Subba Reddy Venkata Subba Reddy Date: 2026.08.12 16:56:09 +05'30' आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपील र्थी / The Appellant; 1. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. DR, ITAT, ‘B’ Bench, Pune 4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

5 ITA No.1742/PUN/2026

S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 05.08.2026 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 10.08.2026 Sr. PS/PS Draft proposed & placed before 3 JM/AM the Second Member Draft discussed/approved by 4 AM/AM Second Member Approved Draft comes to the 5 Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS Date on which the file goes to 9 the Office Superintendent Date on which file goes to the 10 A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order

More judgments on Section 200A

All 4,379 judgments and leading authorities on Section 200A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →