2021 (3) TMI 1416 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay filling appeal before ITAT - Late fee u/s. 234E - delay in filing the TDS statement - intimation u/s. 200A - assessee s contention before CIT(A) was that the provisions of section 234E of the Act was inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 1.7.2012 - CIT(A) has proceeded to hold that the Assessee is guilty of negligence on a presumption that the Assessee must be conversant with operating TDS return on the website of the Department and that the intimation u/s.200A could not have escaped his attention - HELD THAT - In a case like this the benefit of doubt should go to the Assessee. Therefore, the Assessee is not guilty of negligence and the delay was due to bonafide reasons. As per the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji others 1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME COURT delay should be condoned where there is no negligence. The Hon ble Apex Court has emphasized that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations. The Court has also explained that a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging the appeal late. The Court has also explained that every day s delay must be explained does not mean that a pedantic approach should be taken. The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense and pragmatic manner. in the case of MSV IT Solutions Ltd. 2018 (10) TMI 1774 - ITAT HYDERABAD wherein on identical facts noticing that there was no legal remedy prior to 1.6.2015 against an intimation u/s.200A of the Act, the Hyderabad Bench condoned delay in filing appeal before CIT(A). Thus reasons given by the Assessee for condonation of delay and keeping in mind that technicalities should not stand in the way of rendering substantive justice, we are of the view that the delay in filing the appeals deserves to be condoned. Direction to decide the appeals of the Assessee on merits - Appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

Summary

Issues:
Appeals against late fee under section 234E of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 for delayed filing of TDS statements.

Analysis:
1. The Assessee filed 11 appeals against a common order dated 27.6.2019 of CIT(Appeals)-7, Bangalore for assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 regarding late fee levied under section 234E of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 for delayed filing of TDS statements.
2. The Assessee contended that the provisions of section 234E were inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 1.7.2012, and the authority could levy fee u/s.234E only by virtue of the provisions of Sec.200A(1)(c), (d) & (f) of the Act, which came into force from 1.6.2015, challenging the validity of charging the fee.
3. The CIT(A) found inordinate delay in filing the appeals, and the Assessee's reasons for delay were considered, but the delay was not condoned based on precedents emphasizing negligence and lack of bonafide action on the Assessee's part.
4. The Tribunal observed that the delay should be condoned as per the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court and the ITAT Hyderabad Bench, emphasizing substantial justice over technicalities, and remanded the matter to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

Conclusion:
Considering the Assessee's reasons for delay and the principle of substantial justice prevailing over technical considerations, the Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals and remanded the matter to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits. All the appeals by the Assessee were treated as allowed for statistical purposes.