PRAKASHCHAND,CHENNAI vs. ITO, TDS WARD-1,, CHENNAI

आयकर अपील
य अ धकरण, ’डी’ यायपीठ, चेनई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI

ीमनुकुमारिग र, ाियकसद एवं

ीएस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखासदकेसम

BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos. 3063, 3064, 3061 and 3065/Chny/2025
नधारणवष/AYs:2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2014-15
PRAKASHCHAND
9, MARKET STREET PERAMBUR
CHENNAI-600011,
TAMIL NADU v.
The ITO,
TDS Ward-1,
Chennai.
[PAN: AAAPP7796G]
(अपीलाथ /Appellant)
( यथ /Respondent)
अपीलाथ क! ओर से/ Appellant by :
Mr. Hitesh, Advocate
यथ क! ओर से /Respondent by :
Mr. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
सुनवाईक!तार
ख/Date of Hearing
:
17.12.2025
घोषणाक!तार
ख /Date of Pronouncement
:
18.12.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

These four appeals by the assessee are filed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, National Faceless
Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15, vide orders dated 19.08.2025. Since, facts are identical and issues are common filed by the assessee a this consolidated order.
2. The assessee has captioned assessment
3063/Chny/2025 for th
Grounds of appeal fi assessment year 2013-1

, for the sake of convenience, thes re being heard together and dispo raised similar grounds of appeal t years.
We will take up he assessment year 2013-14 as led in ITA No. 3063/Chny/202
14 are reproduced as under:- of the Learned CIT(A) is contrary to ances of the case and is liable to b of the Learned CIT(A) suffers from arned CIT(A) failed to appreciate tha passed u/s 154 of the Act is wi rectification u/s 154 of the Act cannot original assessment order.
ed CIT(A) erred in upholding the actio thout appreciating that the said prov rection of a mistake apparent from r r and cannot be invoked independen assessment denovo.
d CIT(A) has erred in upholding the le section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1
g that for the period prior to 01.06.2
ling provision under section 200A(1)( ch fee while processing TDS statement ned CIT(A) failed to appreciate tha on 200A(1)(c) introduced by the Finan ective in operation and therefore cann

65/Chny/2025
& 2014-15-20)
O, TDS Ward-1
se appeals osed of by for all the ITA
No.
lead case.
25 for the o law, e set mlegal at the ithout t exist on u/s vision record tly to evy of 1961,
2015,
(c) to ts.
t the nce not be applied to TDS sta
01.06.2015

The Appellant crave additional grounds a Tribunal,.

atements pertaining to any period b ed CIT(A) erred in holding that se ates a charge and liability to pay or to 01.06.2015 there was no statu ute or recover such fee, rendering hout juri iction.
d CIT(A) has erred in confirming the he existence of divergent judicial view considering the principle laid down by ourt in CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd o views are possible, the one favourab be followed.
ed CIT(A) further failed to appreciate dicial views exist, the later view in po eferred, which supports the Asses vy of fee under section 234E prio egally tenable.
d CIT(A) erred in not appreciating tha on 234E for a period prior to 01.06. spective application of law, whic he interpretation of fiscal matters u the legislature.
ned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the le on 220(2), which being consequential er. section 234E, is equally unsustaina es leave to alter, amend, modify or at the time of hearing before this Ho case are that the assessee is an riving income from textile business y-to-day business activities. The penditure thus incurred, wherever

65/Chny/2025
& 2014-15-20)
O, TDS Ward-1
before ection y fee, utory the order ws on y the d. (88
ble to e that oint of ssee's or to t levy
.2015
ch is unless evy of to an able.
raise on'ble individual
. It incurs assessee applicable and pays it to the credi quarterly TDS statemen was liable to deduct T u/s.154 of the Act date filing fee of Rs.23,800/
for the third quarter of quarterly TDS returns.
before first appellate a discussion of case laws appeal of the assessee.
4. Aggrieved by the appeal before us.
5. We have heard ld.
perused orders of the involved in the present late fee u/s.234E of th returns beyond prescrib by the decision of Hon case of M/s.Sri Rujula
2024, WMP Nos.4619
ITA Nos. 3063, 3064, 3061 & 30
(AYs 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15 &
::4 ::

it of the central government. It als t as mandated by the statute. The TDS for payments made by it. V ed 28.03.2025, Traces(TDS-CPC) l
- u/s.200A of the Act r.w.s.234E o f financial year 2013-14 for belate
The assessee has challenged late authority. The ld.CIT(A) has after s and provisions of the Act dism learned CIT(A) order, the asses
AR for the assessee and ld.DR.
authorities below. We find that appeals filed by the assessee is o he Act, for belated filing of quar bed date and this issue is squarel
’ble Juri ictional Madras High Co
& 4621 of 2024) dated 12.09

65/Chny/2025
& 2014-15-20)
O, TDS Ward-1
so files its e assessee
Vide order evied late of the Act d filing of fee levied elaborate missed the ssee is in We have the issue on levy of rterly TDS y covered urt in the . 4307 of 9.2024 by following the earlier d caseof 2023(10) TMI
Limited vs. Chief CIT, held as under:-
4. In the present under Section 234
2013-2014. Howev the said assessme
01.06.2015. There
200A of the Act, under Section 234
Section 200A. Hen opinion that the im aside.

ecisions of the Hon’ble High Cou
1141 [M/s.True Blue Voice Indi
TDS [2024] 158 taxmann.com 67
26.06.2024 by holding as under:- e heard ld. Counsel for the assessee and orders of the authorities below. We find th present appeals filed by the assessee is on on 234E of the Act, for belated filing of qu prescribed date and this issue is squarely
Hon’ble Juri ictional Madras High Court in Voice India Private Limited vs. CCIT & Or 2022) dated 09.10.2023 and held as under:
re is no dispute on the aspect of validity of the Act. The only issue that has to be de case is as to whether the late fee can be imp
234E of the Act, while processing the statem

65/Chny/2025
& 2014-15-20)
O, TDS Ward-1
urt in the ia Private
7 (Madras) ate fee only
2012-2013, duced during h effect from nder Section sed late fee
TDS under urt is of the ble to be set d 28.03.2019
ts.
ed by the e case of No.1002- d ld.DR. We hat the issue n levy of late uarterly TDS y covered by n the case of rs (WP Nos.
:- f the Section ecided in the posed under ment of TDS under Se years?

“20
source.—
12. Furth
200A(1)(c

“R
So Un de rat pe qu co qu
Ch tax
Th to sta du pro
TD se fur se in su co

ITA Nos. 3063, 3064, 3061 & 30
(AYs 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15 &
::6 ::

ection 200A of the Act for the subject onsidering the submissions of both the lear e reading Section 234E of the Act, it appe ent/respondents can impose the late f ances mentioned under Section 234E of om 01.07.2012, but not when they proce ection 200A of the Act. In the Finance Bill, 2
c) of the Act was introduced, which reads as 00A. Processing of statements of tax d
—
(1) ......................
(a)......................
(b)........................
(c) the fee, if any, shall be co accordance with the provisions of secti her, the objects and reasons for introductio c) of the Act are as follows:
Rationalisation of provisions relating to Tax D ource (TDS) and Tax Collection at Source (T nder Chapter XVII-B of the Act, a person is educt tax on certain specified payment at t te if the payment exceeds the specified thr erson deducting tax (‘the deductor’) is requ uarterly Tax Deduction at Source (TDS ontaining the details of deduction of tax mad uarter by the prescribed due date. Simi hapter XVII-BB of the Act, a person is requir x on certain specified receipts at the spe he person collecting tax (‘the collector’) also file a quarterly Tax Collection at So atement containing the details of collection uring the quarter by the prescribed due date ovide effective deterrence against delay in DS/TCS statement, the Finance Act, 20
ection 234E in the Act to provide for levy o rnishing of TDS/TCS statement. The levy o ection 234E of the Act has proved to be an e improving the compliance in respec ubmission of TDS/TCS statement by the ollector.

65/Chny/2025
& 2014-15-20)
O, TDS Ward-1
assessment rned counsel ears that the fee for the the Act with ess the TDS
015, Section s follows:
deducted at omputed in ion 234E;”
on of Section Deduction at TCS) s required to the specified reshold. The uired to file a S) statement de during the ilarly, under red to collect ecified rates.
o is required ource (TCS) of tax made e. In order to furnishing of 012 inserted f fee for late of fee under effective tool t of timely deductor or Fi
Ac de de the pro de
Ac the 20
pa pro
Ac

Cu of sta all Ho all of the 20
co

Cu en co
As sta for pro se als pa

inance (No.2) Act, 2009 inserted section ct which provides for processing of TDS sta etermining the amount payable or refund eductor. However, as section 243E was in e insertion of section 200A in the Act, ovisions of section 200A of the Act does no etermination of fee payable under section ct at the time of processing of TDS state erefore, proposed to amend the provision
00A of the Act so as to enable computa ayable under section 234E of the Act at ocessing of TDS statement under section ct.
urrently, the provisions of sub-section (3) of the Act enable the deductor to furnish TD atement and consequently, section 200A lows processing of the TDS correction owever, currently, there does not exist any p lowing a collector to file correction statemen
TCS statement which has been furni erefore, proposed to amend the provision
06C of the Act so as to allow the collector to orrection statement.
urrently, there does not exist any provision nable processing of the TCS statement ollector as available for processing of TDS s the mechanism of TCS statement is sim atement, it is proposed to insert a provisio r processing of TCS statements on the line ovisions for processing of TDS statement ection 200A of the Act. The proposed pro so incorporate the mechanism for comput ayable under section 234E of the Act.”
eading of the above makes it clear tha sm was available for determination of late ection 234E of the Act at the time of proc nts. Thus it was proposed to amend the p
200A of the Act, so as to enable the compu under Section 234E of the Act at the time o tatement under Section 200A of he Act. Th ion 200A(1)(c) of the Act was came to be i m 01.06.2015. 65/Chny/2025
& 2014-15-20)
O, TDS Ward-1
200A in the atements for dable to the nserted after the existing ot provide for 234E of the ments. It is, ns of section ation of fee the time of 200A of the f section 200
DS correction of the Act n statement.
provision for nt in respect ished. It is, ns of section furnish TCS in the Act to filed by the S statement.
milar to TDS on in the Act e of existing contained in ovision shall tation of fee at since no fee payable cessing TDS provisions of utation of fee of processing hus, the said inserted with 14. Now
2012- 13
200A(1)(c dispute o
Section 2
intimation responde the Act. W of the pe have to f
Section 2
01.06.20
makes it 200A(1)(c the delay introducti same, tho from 01.0
the late
Section 2

the dispute is with regard to the assess
3, 2013-14, 2014-15 and the applicability c) of the Act for relevant assessment years.
on the aspect that the TDS statement was 200A of the Act and the respondent had als n under Section 200A of the Act, which ents have processed the returns under Sec
When the respondent had started to process etitioner under Section 200A of the Act, ob follow the requirements under Section 200A
200A(1)(c) of the Act was introduced with 15. A reading of the objects and reasons clear that since no mechanism was availa c) of the Act was introduced for imposing y in filing statement of TDS. Therefore ion of the said Sub-Section it is clear that ough Section 234E of the Act was introduce
07.2012, the Authorities were not empowere fee while processing the statement of 200A of the Act.
learned counsel for the respondent ad ts on the aspect of the imposition of late fee
200A(1)(c) of the Act retrospectively. This C nt with the said submissions of the respon s no provision for imposing the late fee un the Act while filing and processing the T ection 200A of the Act, clause (c) to Sub-S
200A was introduced with effect from e, the aforesaid submission made by for the respondent is rejected by this Court.
her it was stated by the respondent that th o waive the late fee and only the Comm
Tax is empowered to pass the revised orde on of provision of Section 264C of the Act.
ew of the above, it is made clear that the imposed the late fee only under Section 234
assessment years 2012-2013, 2013-2014,
, Section 200A(1)(c) of the Act was no he said assessment years. In the abse s under Section 200A of the Act, when ed the application for TDS under Section 2
be imposed under Section 234E. Hence, in s

65/Chny/2025
& 2014-15-20)
O, TDS Ward-1
sment years y of Section . There is no s filed under so issued the means the ction 200A of s the returns bviously they
A of the Act.
h effect from of the same able, Section g late fee for e, from the t prior to the ed with effect ed to impose
TDS under dvanced his e by applying
Court is not in ndent. Since, nder Section TDS returns
Section (1) to 01.07.2012. the learned hey have no missioner of er by proper e respondent
4E of the Act
2015-2015. t introduced ence of any n they have 200A, no late such view of the matte be set as The Co-ordina
M/s.M.F.Textiles dated 24.02.20
provisions of se
200A by Financ of enabling pro
Officer cannot l filing of quarterly

er, this Court feels that the impugned orders side’’
te Bench of the Tribunal also in th sPvt.Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA Nos. 578 & 579
022 had considered an identical issue ection 234E of the Act and also amendmen e Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and held tha ovision under section 200A of the Act, the levy late fee under section 234E of the Ac y TDS return for period prior to 01.06.2015. esent appeals, on perusal of the facts, we ars involved are prior to 01.06.2015. There red view that the late fee charged by the ection 234E of the Act, while processing qu ection 200A of the Act, is without any a by respectfully following the decisions of Madras High Court in the case of M/s. True imited (supra) and Co-ordinate Bench in sPvt.Ltd (supra), we are of the considered v er cannot levy late fee while processing of 00A of the Act upto the financial year 201
d in the present case pertaining to the fin
2013-14, we direct the Assessing Officer t d under section 234E of the Act in the intim
200A of the Act for the processing of qu he assessee.
all six these appeals filed by the assessee a peals, on perusal of the facts, we nvolved are prior to 01.06.2015. T red view that the late fee charge
234E of the Act, while processing on 200A of the Act, is without any respectfully following the decisio
Madras High Court in the case o

65/Chny/2025
& 2014-15-20)
O, TDS Ward-1
s are liable to he case of 9/Chny/2021
in light of nt to section t in absence e Assessing t for belated find that the efore, we are e Assessing uarterly TDS uthority and the Hon'ble e Blue Voice the case of view that the f TDS return
4-15. Since, nancial years to delete the mation issued uarterly TDS are allowed.
e find that Therefore, ed by the quarterly y authority ons of the of M/s.Sri

Rujula International (su
M/s.Gopuram Enterpris considered view that the processing of TDS retur
2014-15. Since, late fe the financial years 201
Officer to delete the la intimation issued u/s.20
TDS return filed by the a 8. In the result, all th
Order pronounced in the at Chennai. (एस. आर. रघुनाथा)
(S.R.RAGHUNATHA
लेखासद*य/ACCOUNTANT M
चेनई/Chennai,
+दनांक/Dated: 18 December
SNDP, Sr. PS
आदेशक! त,ल-पअ.े-षत/Copy to 1. अपीलाथ/Appellant
2.  थ/Respondent
3. आयकरआयु/CIT, Chennai
4. िवभागीयितिनिध/DR
5. गाडफाईल/GF
ITA Nos. 3063, 3064, 3061 & 30
(AYs 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15 &
::10 ::

upra) and Co-ordinate Bench in th es Private Limited (supra), we a e Assessing Officer cannot levy late n u/s.200A of the Act upto the fina e charged in the present case per
3-14 and 2014-15, we direct the ate fee charged u/s.234E of the A 00A of the Act for the processing of assessee.
he appeals filed by the assessee are e open court on 18th day of Decem
A)
EMBER (मनुकुमारिग
(MANU KUMAR
यायकसद*य/JUDICIA
, 2025. o:
/ Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore.

65/Chny/2025
& 2014-15-20)
O, TDS Ward-1
he case of are of the e fee while ancial year rtaining to Assessing
Act in the f quarterly e allowed.
mber, 2025
र)
R GIRI)
AL MEMBER

ITA Nos. 3063, 3064, 3061 & 30
(AYs 2013-14, 2013-14, 2014-15 &
::11 ::

65/Chny/2025
& 2014-15-20)
O, TDS Ward-1