Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeals were filed by the assessee against orders imposing late fee for belatedly filed TDS returns for Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2015-16. The assessee contended that the levy of late fee under Section 234E was not retrospective.
Held
The Tribunal, following the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in True Blue Voice India (P.) Ltd. v. CCIT(TDS), held that there was no mechanism for determining late fee under Section 234E at the time of processing TDS statements for the relevant period. The amendment made effective from 01.06.2015 was not retrospective.
Key Issues
Whether the levy of late fee under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for belated filing of TDS returns is retrospective for the period prior to 01.06.2015.
Sections Cited
200A(1), 234E
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.
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunatha
O R D E R
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This four appeals filed by the assessee are directed against different orders all dated 25.09.2025 passed by the All./JCIT(A)-2, Japur for the assessment years 2013-14[24Q for Q4 & 26Q for Q4] and 2015-16 [24Q for Q4 & 26Q for Q4] passed under section 200A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short].
Since issues raised in these the appeals of the assessee are similar based on the same identical facts, with the consent of both the parties, we proceed to hear the appeals together and pass consolidated order for the sake of convenience.
We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 17 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admit the appeal for adjudication.
At the outset, the ld. AR Shri Y Sridhar, F.C.A. drew our attention to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of True Blue Voice India (P.) Ltd. v. CCIT(TDS) 472 ITR 480 and submits that imposition of late fee for delay in furnishing statement under section 234E of the Act is not retrospective and not applicable prior to 01.06.2015. Thus, he prayed to follow the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras and delete the penalty levied under section 234E of the Act.
The ld. DR Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl. CIT submits that the provisions of section 234E of the Act has been introduced with effect from 01.07.2012 prescribing for charging of a fee for every day of default in filing of statement under clause (c) of section 200A of the Act and the fee, if any, shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of section 234E of the Act. Thus, she prayed to confirm the order of the ld. CIT(A).
Having heard both the parties, we note that the assessee filed TDS returns in Form 24Q for Quarter-4 of FY 2012-13 belatedly on 20.03.2015 while the due date for filing such form was 15.05.2013. The CPC Bengaluru processed Form 24Q under section 200A of the Act and tax demanded at ₹.51,500/- towards late fee under section 234E of the Act. The first appellate authority confirmed the fee levied under section 234E of the Act. We have perused the case law relied on by the ld. AR in the case of True Blue Voice India (P.) Ltd. v. CCIT(TDS) (supra), wherein, substantial question of law on similar facts has been raised. The Hon’ble High of Madras was pleased to hold that there was no mechanism available for determination of late fee payable under section 234E of the Act at the time of processing TDS statements and thus, amendment was inserted under sub-section (1)(c) of section 200A of the Act w.e.f. 01.06.2015 for computation of fee payable under section 234E of the Act at the time of processing of TDS statement under section 200A of the Act. The Hon’ble High Court further held that the said amendment under sub- section (1)(c) of section 200A of the Act is not retrospective. Respectfully following the above decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of True Blue Voice India (P.) Ltd. v. CCIT(TDS) (supra), the late fee levied by the CPC under section 234E of the Act for the FY 2012-13 relevant to AY 2013-14 and confirmed by the first appellate authority stands deleted. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.
[26Q for Q4] AY 2013-14
We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 17 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admit the appeal for adjudication.
We find that the facts relating to levy of late fee for belated filing of TDS returns in Form 26Q for the quarter-4 is similar to the TDS returns in Form 24Q for the quarter-4 in 234E of the Act is deleted by following the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of True Blue Voice India (P.) Ltd. v. CCIT (supra) in the above mentioned paragraphs and the same finding is applicable equally to the case in hand in [26Q for Q4]. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.
& 3848/Chny/2025[26Q for Q4 and 24Q for Q4] AY 2015-16
We find that both the appeals are filed with a delay of 17 days. The assessee filed affidavits for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeals in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admits the appeal for adjudication.
We find that the facts relating to levy of late fee for belated filing 11 of TDS returns in both Form 26Q for the quarter-4 and Form 24Q for the quarter -4 for AY 2015-16 is similar to the assessment year 2013- 14 and the findings given herein above in & 3846/Chny/2025 are applicable equally to the case in hand for AY 2015-16. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals are allowed.
In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced on 24th February, 2026 at Chennai.