KALYANA SUNDARAM,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CPC, TDS, GAZIABAD

Sr. Appeal Numbers Assessment Appellant Respondent No Years 1 2013-14 (26Q-Q3) Kalyana Sundaram, DCIT, 2 ITA No.625/Chny/2022 2013-14 (26Q-Q4) (Prop: High Breed CPC, Fashions – High Breed Ghaziabad. 3 ITA No.626/Chny/2022 2014-15 (26Q-Q1) Colours) 4. ITA No.627/Chny/2022 2014-15 (26Q-Q2) 3/217, Sevanthapalayam, 5. ITA No.628/Chny/2022 2014-15 (26Q-Q4) Coimbatore – 641 602. [PAN: AHGPK-6566-N] [TAN: CMBS-06495-G] अपीलाथ� की ओरसे/ Appellant by : Adjournment Letter dated 20.08.2022 ��थ� की ओरसे/Respondent by : Ms. M.S. Deeptha (JCIT) –Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25-08-2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 25-08-2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

ITA Nos.624 to 628/Chny/2022 - 2 - 2. Upon perusal of para 7.3 of impugned order dated 27.05.2022 in it could be noted that the assessee had challenged the levy of late filing fees u/s 234E in an intimation issued by CPC u/s 154 on 15.02.2020. However, the fee was actually levied in intimation / order passed u/s 200A on 03.01.2014 while processing the regular return. The Ld. CIT(A) noted that late filing fees u/s 234E is actually calculated for the delay in filing the original / regular TDS quarterly statement from the due date and for each day of delay, fees of Rs.200 per day is charged. This fee is levied while processing the original / regular TDS quarterly statement only u/s 200A though the amount of late filing fee keeps reflecting in subsequent intimation issued u/s 154. In other word, no fees is levied in intimation issued u/s 154 and therefore, the appeal challenging the levy of fees has to be against original order passed u/s 200A processing the original TDS quarterly statement wherein such fees was levied. The same, in the present case, was passed on 03.01.2014 against which no appeal has been preferred by the assessee. It was thus held that the grounds of appeal challenging levy of fee do not emanate from order passed u/s 154. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. Similar are the facts as well as adjudication in all the other appeals.

3. Upon due consideration of material fact, it could be gathered that the assessee has challenged levy of fee u/s 234E which is levied for late filing of quarterly TDS returns. From the impugned order, it emanates that this fee is levied while processing the original / regular TDS quarterly statement only u/s 200A though the amount of late filing fee keeps reflecting in subsequent intimation issued u/s 154 against to 628/Chny/2022 - 3 - correction statement filed by the assessee. In other words, no fees is levied in an intimation issued u/s 154 and therefore, the appeal challenging the levy of fees has to be against original order passed u/s 200A processing the original TDS quarterly statement wherein such fees was levied. The same, in the present case, was passed on 03.01.2014 against which no appeal has been preferred by the assessee. The assessee has challenged levy of fees as reflected in an intimation issued u/s 154 on 15.02.2020. Therefore, as rightly held by Ld. CIT(A), the grounds of appeal challenging levy of fee u/s 234E do not emanate from orders passed u/s 154. Accordingly, no fault could be found in the impugned orders.

4. All the appeals stands dismissed. Order pronounced on 25th August, 2022.