9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 272 - AT - Income TaxLate fees u/s 234E for delay in filing the quarterly TDS statements as per Section 200A Fee - Appeal time barred - Held that - Levy of fee under section 234E for default in furnishing statements is mandatory. No appeal provided against order under section 234E before Ld. CIT(A). According to submissions of the assessee, the A.O. intimated that orders levying fees under section 234E is available on line. Therefore, Ld. CIT(A) correctly noted that assessee used the same email ID which have been used for filing of the return for each quarter in the year under reference. Therefore, Ld. CIT(A) rightly held that the impugned orders have been served upon assessee through online and there is no reason why the orders did not reach the assessee. The contention of assessee has been rightly rejected by the Ld. CIT(A). No sufficient cause have been explained for the delay in filing the appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). CIT(A) correctly held that appeals are time barred and same were accordingly dismissed. When TDS returns/statements have been filed by assessee for each quarter online and orders have been served upon assessee online for payment of the late fees, then the assessee is required to take steps within the reasonable period as per law. When the appeals are not maintainable before Ld. CIT(A), the same would also be not maintainable before the Tribunal. - Decided against assessee
Issues:
Appeals against order of levying late fees under section 234E of the I.T. Act for late furnishing of TDS statements for different quarters in A.Ys. 2014-2015 and 2015-2016. Analysis: The appeals were delayed, with a delay of 686 to 860 days, and the assessee claimed they were not aware of the late fee imposition until a notice of outstanding demand was received. The assessee approached the authority for certified copies of the order, which were downloaded online and appeals filed immediately. However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals as time-barred, stating that the late fee orders were served online and the delay was not beyond the assessee's control. The Ld. CIT(A) cited case laws emphasizing that sufficient cause for delay must be beyond the petitioner's control. The appeals were dismissed on grounds of delay and non-maintainability due to the nature of the demand under section 234E. The provision of Section 234E of the I.T. Act mandates a fee for late furnishing of statements, applicable when a person fails to deliver statements within the prescribed time. The late fees were imposed for delayed filing of quarterly TDS statements, and the Ld. CIT(A) correctly noted that the orders were served online. The appeals were dismissed as time-barred, with no sufficient cause explained for the delay. The Ld. CIT(A) held that appeals were not maintainable before him, citing the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. Since the orders were not appealable before the Ld. CIT(A), there was no requirement for separate service of the orders upon the assessee. Consequently, the appeals were not maintainable before the Tribunal, and the Ld. CIT(A)'s order was confirmed, dismissing all the appeals. In conclusion, all the appeals by the assessee against the order of levying late fees under section 234E of the I.T. Act were dismissed by the Tribunal. The delay in filing the appeals was deemed unjustified, and the non-maintainability of the appeals before the Ld. CIT(A) was upheld. The imposition of late fees for delayed filing of TDS statements was found to be in accordance with the law, and the dismissal of the appeals was upheld based on the legal provisions and the findings of the Ld. CIT(A).
|
