Loading judgment…
Facts
This batch of 14 appeals concerns the levy of late fees under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The assessee's TDS returns for these periods were filed belatedly and processed under Section 200A.
Held
The Tribunal held that the amendment to Section 200A, which empowers the Revenue to charge fees under Section 234E, is prospective and effective from June 1, 2015. Therefore, no such fee can be levied for defaults occurring prior to this date.
Key Issues
Whether late fees under Section 234E can be levied for TDS statements filed belatedly for periods prior to June 1, 2015, given that the enabling provision became effective from that date.
Sections Cited
234E, 200A, 220(2), 154
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
आदेश / ORDER PER BENCH:
This batch of 14 appeals at the instance of assessee are directed against the different orders dated 10.06.2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). The only issue raised in these appeals is the charging of interest u/s.234E for the quarters relating to Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15.
When the appeals were called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee eventhough valid notices were served. However, written submissions have been filed before this Tribunal on 01.09.2025. Considering the fact that the common issue raised in this batch of appeals has already been decided by this Tribunal in plethora of decisions, we proceed to adjudicate this batch of appeals with the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative and available records.
Identical grounds have been raised by assessee in all these appeals. We therefore proceed to dispose of these appeals by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.
“1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC erred in dismissing the appeal and upholding the levy of late fees under section 234E of the Act in respect of TDS statements filed for the 1" quarter of FY 2013-14 when such provision was not in existence or was not in force at the relevant time. The Appellate Order therefore so passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in confirming the levy of late fees under section 234E being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in-law be quashed/set-aside.
2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the decisions of various jurisdictional tribunal referred by the assessee and Ld. CIT(A) also out to have considered the decision favourable to assessee in case of conflicting decisions.
3. That the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the enabling provision under section 200A for levy of fees under section 234E came into effect prospectively w.e.f. 01.06.2015, and hence, no fee under section 234E could have been levied for a delay occurring prior to such date while processing TDS statements. The Appellate Order therefore so passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in confirming the levy of late fees under section 234E being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in-law be quashed/set-aside.
That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of interest under section 220(2) of the Act without proper justification or basis and without determining whether there was any default in payment of demand as per law.
That the orders passed by the lower authorities are bad in law, void ab-initio, and without jurisdiction to the extent they impose fees and interest which are not sustainable under the provisions of the Act as applicable to the relevant period.
That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal
at the time of hearing.”
5. Brief facts common to these appeals are that TDS returns for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 corresponding to respective quarters captioned above were filed belatedly. The same were processed by Central Processing Cell (in short “CPC”) u/s.200A levying fee u/s.234E of the Act. The assessee filed rectification applications u/s.154 of the Act for removal of late fee u/s.234E but failed to succeed. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal(s) before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC but failed to get any relief. Now the assessee is in appeal(s) before this Tribunal.
6. Ld. Departmental Representative supported the orders passed by the lower authorities and vehemently argued for confirming the late fee levied u/s.234E of the Act.
We have heard the ld. DR and perused the records placed before us. The solitary issue in this batch of appeals is against the levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act by CPC for delay in filing the TDS quarterly returns and Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC confirming such levy of fee u/s.234E for filing the Quarterly returns after the due date.
We observe that the issue of levy of fee u/s.234E prior to 01.06.2015 is no more res integra by virtue of several decisions rendered by this Tribunal on this very issue. Details of date of filing of quarterly return and the original processing dates for the quarters referred in the instant bunch of appeals are reproduced below :
8.1 The above details show that the late fee u/s.234E has been imposed for the delay in furnishing the statements for quarters, in the returns processed u/s.200A of the Act prior to 01.06.2015. As regards the fate of fees levied u/s.234E of the Act for the returns filed and processed before 01.06.2015, we find the Coordinate Benches of this Tribunal after considering the judicial pronouncements have been taking a consistent view that the amendment brought in Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015 under Section 200A (clause (c)] of the Act is prospective in nature thereby empowering the Revenue authorities to charge fee u/s.234E of the Act only after 01.06.2015. In that view of the matter, Revenue authorities are empowered to impose such late fee u/s.234E only for the default committed after 01.06.2015 and not prior to that. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Olari Little Flower Kuries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and others (2022) 440 ITR 26 (Kerala) has affirmed the non-imposition of fee for the period prior to 01.06.2015. Similar view has been taken in Jiji Varghese VS. ITO(TDS) & Ors. (2022) 443 ITR 267 (Ker) holding that no fee u/s.234E can be imposed for the periods of the respective A.Ys. prior to 1st June, 2015. Similar view was also taken by this Tribunal in the case of Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe Vs. ITO (TDS), Pune in to 1309/PUN/2023, dated 29.02.2024, Ram Refrigeration and Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ahmednagar in to 887/PUN/2025 dated 23.05.2025 and Vidya Sunil Mane Vs. ITO (TDS), Kolhapur in ITA Nos. 128 to 131/PUN/2024 dated 28.03.2024. Thus, we find that the issue raised in the instant appeals is covered in favour of the assessee by the above referred decisions as the returns u/s.200A(c) were processed before 01.06.2015.
Respectfully following the judicial precedents, we reverse the impugned orders passed by ld.CIT(A)/NFAC on this sole issue and allow the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in all these fourteen appeals and direct the Revenue authorities to delete the impugned late fee levied u/s.234E of the Act.
In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed.
Order pronounced on this 10th day of September, 2025.