2023 (2) TMI 471 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification u/s 154 - validity of levy of late filing fee u/s 234E along with interest u/s 220 - order passed u/s 200A - HELD THAT - Out of that 176 appeals were listed before the Coordinate Bench, who has commenced the hearing on 16th January, 2023 and ultimately concluded it on 19th January, 2023 2023 (2) TMI 433 - ITAT PATNA held merely, giving the statement of the exact amount due to the assessee, that too, at the request of the assessee, is just the calculation provided by the Assessing Officer and the assessee, in this respect, can agitate only if the assessee is aggrieved by the aforesaid calculation given by the Assessing Officer. The assessee in the process of requesting and taking calculation of interest due cannot be said to have acquired any cause of action or right to challenge the original order passed u/s 200A of the Act. The assessee has not pointed out as to what mistake has occurred in the order passed u/s 154 of the Act as compared to the original order dated 27.04.2015 passed u/s 200A of the Act. In fact, no mistake apparent on record, has been alleged in the said order by the assessee itself in its correction statement/request. If the assessee is aggrieved by an order passed u/s 154 of the Act he will be entitled to file appeal against the said order. However, the assessee must bring out from the record as to what prejudice has been caused to the assessee in the order passed u/s 154 of the Act when compared with the original order which has been amended or rectified. Neither any rectification has been done by the Assessing Officer to the original order nor any cause of action has accrued to the assessee by getting up-to-date calculation of the demand. In view of this, there is no merit in the appeal of the assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Late filing fees under section 234E of the Income Tax Act along with interest under section 220(2) challenged by the Assessee-Bank.
2. Interpretation of section 200A of the Act in relation to the levy of late filing fees under section 234E.
3. Conflict of decisions between different High Courts regarding the retrospective application of section 200A.
4. Assessment of the Assessee's failure to challenge original orders passed under section 200A of the Act.
5. Consideration of rectification applications under section 154 of the Act and the limitation period.
6. Condonation of delay in filing appeals against original orders due to non-service of intimation/orders.

Analysis:
1. The appeals involved challenges by the Assessee-Bank against the levy of late filing fees under section 234E of the Income Tax Act along with interest under section 220(2). The Assessee contended that the fees were raised for TDS statements filed belatedly, with the dispute centering on the retrospective application of section 200A in computing such fees.

2. The Tribunal delved into the interpretation of section 200A concerning the computation of late filing fees under section 234E. The Assessee relied on decisions by the Karnataka and Kerala High Courts, arguing for a prospective application of the amendment to section 200A from June 1, 2015, thereby contesting the validity of fees levied before this date.

3. The Tribunal noted conflicting decisions among High Courts regarding the retrospective effect of section 200A. While the Assessee cited rulings supporting a limited application, the Revenue highlighted a Gujarat High Court decision emphasizing the independent operation of sections 200A and 234E.

4. Assessing the Assessee's failure to challenge original orders passed under section 200A, the Tribunal observed that the Assessee did not contest the demands raised in 2015 until filing correction statements in 2021. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of challenging orders within the prescribed time limits.

5. The Tribunal scrutinized the rectification applications under section 154 of the Act and the limitation period for such appeals. It emphasized that mere requests for information or calculations did not constitute rectification applications, requiring specific grievances and challenges to the original orders.

6. Regarding the condonation of delay in filing appeals due to non-service of intimation/orders, the Tribunal directed the Assessee to explain the causes of delay and indicated that time consumed during ongoing litigation would not count towards the limitation period for filing appeals against the original orders.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed all appeals of the Assessee-Bank, citing identical circumstances in each case and upholding the decisions of the Coordinate Bench. The judgment highlighted the importance of timely challenges to orders, proper rectification procedures, and the need for explanations in cases of delayed appeals.