VEGA ASSOCITES,TIRUCHIRAPALLI vs. ACIT,CPC, BANGALORE
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal concurred with the CIT(A)'s decision to dismiss the appeals due to inordinate and unsubstantiated delays. The assessee failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the late filing.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals with significant delays for Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16, seeking condonation. The assessee claimed a bona fide impression that Section 234E fees were not leviable before June 1, 2015.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing appeals against the levy of fees under Section 234E for late filing of TDS returns can be condoned. Whether the assessee provided sufficient cause for the inordinate delay.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.177/Chny/2022 (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपीलसं./ (िनधाDरणवषD / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vega Associates ACIT बनाम/ No. C-17 3rd Cross, North East Extension CPC, Vs. Thillai Nagar, Trichirapalli – 620 018. Bangalore. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/TAN:AAGFV-1380-E / CHEM-12461-B (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 12-05-2022 Date of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 12-05-2022 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
The grievance of the assessee in aforesaid appealsfor Assessment Years (AY) 204-15 & 2015-16 is common i.e., levy of Fees u/s 234E for late filing of Quarterly TDS returns. None has appeared for assessee. On the last occasions also, none appeared for assessee. Left with no option, & 178/Chny/2022 - 2 - we proceed to dispose-off the appeals on the basis of material on record. The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeals on the ground that appeals were dismissed by first appellate authority for want of condonation of inordinate delay.
The Registry has noted a delay of 133 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by the assessee. Keeping in view the fact that the impugned orders were passed during lockdown period arising out of Covid-19 Pandemic, we condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication on merits. 3. These appeals arise out of the separate orders passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [CIT(A)] on 09.09.2021 in the matter of demand raised by CPC (TDS) levying fees u/s 234E for late filing of quarterly TDS returns. 4. Upon perusal of impugned orders, it could be seen that the appeals were filed by the assessee with inordinate delay of 1494 days for AY 2014-15 and 1365 days for AY 2015-16. In support of condonation, the assessee submitted that it was under the bona fide impression that fee u/s 234E was not leviable prior to 01.06.2015 and the same need not be paid by the assessee. However, Ld. CIT(A), in an elaborate manner, refused to admit the appeals on the ground that the inordinate delay remained unsubstantiated without any plausible explanation. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 5. After going through the impugned orders, we concur with the adjudication of Ld. CIT(A). It was incumbent on the assessee to show sufficient cause for inordinate late filing of the appeal. However, the assessee could not demonstrate any sufficient cause for late filing of the & 178/Chny/2022 - 3 - appeals. Accordingly, the appeals have rightly been dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) and we see no reason to interfere in the same. 6. Both the appeals stands dismissed. Order pronounced on 12th May, 2022.
More judgments on Section 234E
- Mulchand Ramkishan Laddha, Pune vs Income Tax Officer (TDS-2), PuneITA 874/PUN/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2669/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2668/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2667/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2666/PUN/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026