Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘B’ BENCH,
Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, & SHRI KUL BHARAT
PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the ld. CIT(A) - 41, New Delhi dated 30.04.2019 pertaining to Assessment Year 2015-16.
The grievances of the assessee read as under:
“1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-41, New Delhi has erred both in law and on facts in upholding the addition of Rs.9,000/- being fees u/s 234E of the Income Tax Act,1961 in respect of delay in filling of Quarter-4 TDS statement in form 26Q. That the sub clause (c) was inserted under subsection (1) of the section 200A of the Act for charging fee u/s 234E of the Act by Finance Act 2015 w.e.f 01.06.2015 i.e. the returns filed from the Financial Period 2015-16.
2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) while upholding the levy of fees u/s 234E, had dismissed the appeal by rejecting the condonation request of the appellant Company.
3. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had not even considered that the delay in filling the appeal was due to change of Consultant of the appellant Company from Bhudladia & Co to Anil Khatri & Co.
That the appellant had also filed rectification application u/s 154 for rectifying the demand created u/s 234E, which is still pending with the department. That further in view of no action on the rectification application, the appellant filed an appeal alongwith condonation of delay.
That the fact is that the same learned CIT(A) -41 in the case of appellant company in the similar cases for FY 13-14 & FY 14-15 wherein has deleted the fees charged u/s 234 vide his order dated 16.11.2018.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee and we decided to proceed exparte.
4. A perusal of the order of the first appellate authority shows that the ld. CIT(A), without condoning the delay, dismissed the appeal in limine.
5. In our considered opinion, technicalities should not come in the way of imparting justice. Moreso, when the assessee has given plausible reason for delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we restore the appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal on merits of the case.
We also find that some rectification filed u/s 154 is pending. The ld. CIT(A) is also directed to expedite the matter in disposing the rectification appeal.
In the result, appeal of the assessee in is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open court on 24.01.2022.