M/S. PROVISO SERVICES INDIA (P) LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT (CPC- TDS), GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2328/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 December 2019AY 2016-178 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed a speaking order on merits with detailed reasons. No new material was presented to persuade the Tribunal to differ from the CIT(A)'s view. Therefore, the Tribunal declined to interfere with the impugned order.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which dismissed their appeal. The AO had levied a late filing fee under Section 234E for TDS returns. The assessee contended that the late filing was procedural and did not cause revenue loss, and that there was a reasonable cause.

What were the issues?

Whether the late filing fee under Section 234E is leviable when the TDS was deposited on time and the delay was procedural with no loss of revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 234E,Section 200A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

[A] This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the impugned appellate order dated 31.01.2017 passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-41, New Delhi, [in short, “Ld.CIT(A)”] pertaining to Assessment Year 2016-17. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

“1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case, it was not justified on the part of the department to levy the late filing fees u/s 234E of the I.T. Act amounting to Rs. 3,000/- relevant to 2nd Quarter-July 2015 to September 2015.

ITA No.- 2328/Del/2017. Proviso Services India (P) Ltd. That the appellant had duly deposited the total TDS with the Bank and the late filing of return was only a procedural in nature and did not result into any loss of revenue. That the appellant had a reasonable cause for not filing the return in time and no fee for late filing deserves to be levied.

2.

That the orders of the lower authorities are not justified on facts and same are bad in law.

3.

That the assessee craves the right to add, amend, delete or substitute any ground of appeal.”

[B] The Assessing Officer (“AO”, for short) issued Intimation under Section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“I.T. Act”, for short) order dated 22.12.2015, wherein late filing fee of Rs. 3000/-was charged under Section 234E of I.T. Act. The Assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Vide impugned appellate order dated 31.01.2017, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal. The relevant portion of the order dated 31.01.2017 of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under:

“

ITA No.- 2328/Del/2017. Proviso Services India (P) Ltd. ITA No.- 2328/Del/2017. Proviso Services India (P) Ltd. ITA No.- 2328/Del/2017. Proviso Services India (P) Ltd. ITA No.- 2328/Del/2017. Proviso Services India (P) Ltd.

”

[C] This present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 31.01.2017of the Ld. CIT(A). At the time of hearing, Revenue was represented by Shri Surender Pal, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (“Ld. Sr. DR”, for short). However, none was present from the assessee’s side. In the absence of any representation from assessee’s side, at the time of hearing before us, we heard the Ld. Sr. DR; who relied upon the order of Intimation under Section 200A of I.T. Act, dated 22.12.2015 and the aforesaid impugned order dated 31.01.2017 of the Ld. CIT(A). After perusal of the materials on record, including the aforesaid order dated 22.12.2015 and the aforesaid impugned order dated 31.01.2017 of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed speaking order on merits. Relevant portion of the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) has already been ITA No.- 2328/Del/2017. Proviso Services India (P) Ltd. reproduced in foregoing paragraph [B] of this order. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has given detailed reasons for his decision on merits in the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 31.01.2017 of Ld. CIT(A). During appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”, for short) no material has been brought for our consideration to persuade us to take a view different from the view taken by the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order on merit. After hearing the Ld. Sr. DR and after perusal of materials on record, and further, in view of the foregoing discussion, we decline to interfere with the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 31.01.2017 of Ld. CIT(A), and accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

[D] Before we part; we explicitly clarify that the assessee will be at liberty to approach ITAT for restoration of the appeal in accordance with Proviso to Rule 24 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal), Rules, 1963. If the assessee does approach ITAT for restoration of the appeals in ITAT, the matter will be considered in accordance with law having regard to the facts and circumstances.

[E] In the result, appeal filed by Assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17/12/2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (AMIT SHUKLA) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 17/12/2019 Pooja/-

ITA No.- 2328/Del/2017. Proviso Services India (P) Ltd. Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI

Date of dictation

Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating Member Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other Member

Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS

Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT

Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk

Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk

More judgments on Section 234E

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →