Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Shree Govind Steels, faced a levy of Rs. 17,400/- under Section 234E by the CPC for delayed filing of its TDS return for Quarter-1, F.Y. 2014-15. The return was processed on 30.03.2015. The appeal challenges this levy, arguing it pertains to a period prior to the amendment of Section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which became effective on 01.06.2015.
Held
The Tribunal held that the amendment to Section 200A (clause (c)) by the Finance Act, 2015, is prospective in nature. Therefore, the Revenue authorities are empowered to levy a fee under Section 234E only for defaults committed on or after 01.06.2015. Since the assessee's return was processed before this effective date, the CPC lacked the jurisdiction to impose the said fee.
Key Issues
Whether a fee levied under Section 234E for delayed filing of TDS returns is valid when the return was processed under Section 200A prior to its amendment effective from 01.06.2015.
Sections Cited
Section 234E, Section 200A, Section 200A(c), Section 206CB
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.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
PER DR. MANISH BOARD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 is directed against the order dated 27.01.2025 framed by Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Bengaluru arising out of Intimation Order dated 30.03.2025 passed u/s.200A/206CB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. Even on the previous date on hearing, i.e. 28.07.2025, 25.09.2025 and 14.10.2025 the case is being adjourned either due to non representation/seeking time. Further, on perusal of the grounds of appeal, we notice that the issue relates to levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act prior to amendment brought in u/s.200A of the Act w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and the issue has been dealt by this Tribunal in plethora of decisions. We therefore
We have heard the ld. DR and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is a partnership firm and TDS return for Quarter-1 for F.Y. 2014-15 has been processed by CPC on 30.03.2015 and fee u/s.234E of the Act at Rs.17,400/- has been levied. We observe that similar issue has been dealt by this Tribunal in the case of Utkarsh Balaso Patil Vs.ITO (TDS Ward, Kolhapur) in to 1683/PUN/2025 & others order dated 10.09.2025 where it has been held that prior to amendment brought in section 200A of the Act w.e.f. 01.06.2015, there was no jurisdiction with the CPC for levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act in the return processed u/s.200A of the Act. Finding of Tribunal reads as follows :
“7. We have heard the ld. DR 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.
We observe that the issue of levy of fee u/s.234E prior to 01.06.2015 is no more res integra by virtue of several decisions rendered by this Tribunal on this very issue. Details of date of filing of quarterly return and the original processing dates for the quarters referred in the instant bunch of appeals are reproduced below :
8.1 The above details show that the late fee u/s.234E has been imposed for the delay in furnishing the statements for quarters, in Shree Govind Steels the returns processed u/s.200A of the Act prior to 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 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 Flower Kuries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and others (2022) 440 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 to 1309/PUN/2023, dated 29.02.2024, Ram Refrigeration and Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ahmednagar in to 887/PUN/2025 dated 23.05.2025 and Vidya Sunil Mane Vs. ITO (TDS), Kolhapur in to 131/PUN/2024 dated 28.03.2024. Thus, we find that the issue raised in the instant appeals is covered in favour of the assessee by the above referred decisions as the returns u/s.200A(c) were processed before 01.06.2015.
Respectfully following the judicial precedents, we reverse the impugned orders passed by ld.CIT(A)/NFAC on this sole issue and allow the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in all these fourteen appeals and direct the Revenue authorities to delete the impugned late fee levied u/s.234E of the Act.”
Respectfully following the above decision and similarity of issue and facts of the instant appeal, the impugned fee levied u/s.234E of the Act is deleted. Effective Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on this 06th day of January, 2026.