Case Law Details
Block Development Officer Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur)
The issue under consideration is whether the late filing fees for TDS return u/s 234E is mandatory in nature or it can be condone if there is reasonable cause?
ITAT states that the levy of late fee as prescribed U/s 234E of the Act is mandatory and consequential, therefore, the same cannot be deleted on the ground of reasonable cause as explained by the assessee. It is pertinent to mention that though the intimation issued U/s 200A of the Act is an appealable order, however, the said order can be challenged only on the ground that the adjustment made by the A.O. or intimation issued U/s 200A of the Act is not in accordance with the provisions of Section 234E or Section 200A of the Act. Only if the A.O. has failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of these Sections while making the adjustment and issuing the intimation, the same can be challenged in the appeal. In absence of any such allegation that the A.O. has violated any of the provisions of Section 234E or Section 200A of the Act, the adjustment made by the A.O. on account of late filing fee U/s 234E of the Act cannot be deleted. Accordingly, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
These six appeals by the assessee are directed against the six separate orders all dated 04/04/2019 of ld. CIT(A)-3, Jaipur for the Financial Years :2015-16 & 2016-17 (24Q & 26Q, 2nd, 3rd & 4th Quarter) arising from the order U/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) whereby the A.O. has made adjustment on account of fee leviable U/s 234E of the Act while issuing the intimation U/s 200A of the Act for the F.Y. 2015-16 and 2016-17 respectively. The assessee has raised common grounds in these appeals. The grounds raised in ITA No. 891/JP/2019 are reproduced as under:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
