SHRIKRISHNA LAXMINARAYAN THAKUR,MHAPAN, VENGURLA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE

BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Sl. No.
ITA No(s).
Name of the Applicant
Name of Respondent

Asst.
Year
Quar ter
Form
1-9
ITA Nos.2299
to 2307/PUN/2024
Shrikrishna
Laxminarayan Thakur,
Khalchawada Vengurla,
Mhapan
Sindhudurga-416522,
Maharashtra
TAN : KLPSO6134C
ITO
TDS Ward,
Kolhapur
2013-14

2014-15
2014-15
2014-15
2014-15

2015-16
2015-16
2015-16
2015-16

Q4

Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4

Q1
Q4
Q3
Q2
26Q

26Q
26Q
26Q
26Q

26Q
26Q
26Q
26Q

10-11
ITA Nos.2165 &
2166/PUN/2024
Shrikrishna
Laxminarayan Thakur,
Khalchawada Vengurla,
Mhapan
Sindhudurga-416522,
Maharashtra
PAN : AAQPT5571P
ACIT,
CPC-TDS,
Ghaziabad
2013-14
2013-14
Q3
Q2
26Q
26Q
12
-do-
CIT, Delhi
2013-14
Q2
26Q
13
-do-
ITO
TDS Ward,
Kolhapur
2016-17
Q1
26Q

Assessee by :
Smt. Deepa Khare
Revenue by :
Shri Arvind Desai
Date of hearing
:
07.01.2025
Date of pronouncement
:
23.01.2025

Shrikrishna Laxminarayan
Thakur Group

2
आदेश / ORDER
PER BENCH:

This batch of 13 appeals at the instance of assessee are directed against the different orders dated 09.11.2023 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 arising in Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15,
2015-16 and 2016-17. 2. 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.
3. Brief facts common to these appeals are that TDS returns for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 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 the Tribunal.

Shrikrishna Laxminarayan
Thakur Group

3
4. 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.
5. We have heard both the parties 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.
6. We observe that the issue of levy of fee u/s.234E is no more res integra by virtue of several decisions rendered by this Tribunal on this very issue. It shows 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 and post 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

Shrikrishna Laxminarayan
Thakur Group

4
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
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 ITA Nos.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023, dated
29.02.2024. Thus, it is seen that the issue raised in the following appeals is covered in favour of the assessee as the returns u/s.200A(c) were processed before 01.06.2015. Sl. No.
ITA No(s).
Asst.
Year
Quar ter
Form
Order date
2013-14
Q4
26Q
20.01.2014
2
2014-15

Q1

26Q
15.03.2014
3
2014-15

Q2

26Q
15.03.2014
4
2014-15

Q3
26Q
15.03.2014
5
2014-15

Q4
26Q
11.10.2014
6
2013-14
Q3
26Q
20.01.2014
7
2013-14
Q2
26Q
20.01.2014
8
2013-14
Q2
26Q
20.01.2014

Shrikrishna Laxminarayan
Thakur Group

Sl. No.
ITA No(s).
Asst.
Year
Quar ter
Form
Order date
2015-16
Q1
26Q
27.10.2015
2
2015-16

Q4

26Q
28.10.2015
3
2015-16
Q3

26Q
24.10.2015

Shrikrishna Laxminarayan
Thakur Group

6
4
2015-16
Q2
26Q
24.10.2015
5
2016-17
Q1
26Q
25.08.2016

Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in respect of the above-mentioned five appeals are partly allowed.

Order pronounced on this 23rd day of January, 2025. (VINAY BHAMORE)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
पुणे / Pune;
दनांक / Dated : 23rd January, 2025. Satish

आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant.
2. यथ / The Respondent.
3. The Pr. CIT concerned.
4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” बच,
पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune.

//// Senior Private Secretary

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.