A1 ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 63/CHNY/2022Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 May 2022AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had filed an affidavit for condonation of delay which was overlooked by the CIT(A). Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and restored the appeals to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits after considering the condonation of delay.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the levy of fees under Section 234E for late filing of TDS returns. The appeals were not admitted by the CIT(A) due to a lack of condonation petition for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in not admitting the appeals for want of condonation of delay, and if the delay should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 234E

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

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Kathir (Advocate) – Ld. AR, Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
For Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

Heard together (3 matters)

ITA Nos. 62/Chny/2022
ITA Nos.63/Chny/2022
ITA No. 64/Chny/2022

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aggrieved by levy of fees u/s 234E for late filing of TDS returns, the assessee is in further appeal before us for various quarters of to 64/Chny/2022 - 2 - Assessment Years (AY) 2013-14 to 2015-16. The impugned orders have not admitted the appeals of the assessee for want of condonation of delay since the assessee did not prefer any condonation petition before first appellate authority. However, Ld. AR submitted that affidavit for condonation of delay dated 14.11.2019 was filed on 30.11.2021 which is duly supported by the e-proceedings response acknowledgement as kept on record. After going through these documents, we concur with the submissions of Ld. AR that the documents filed by the assessee have been overlooked by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center.

2.

Therefore on the given facts and circumstances, we set aside the impugned orders and restore the appeals back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to consider assessee’s condonation of delay and if the delay is condoned, adjudicate the issue on merits. The assessee would be afforded sufficient opportunity of hearing.

3.

All the appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 12th May, 2022.

More judgments on Section 234E

All 4,792 judgments and leading authorities on Section 234E →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →