2024 (9) TMI 1619 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification u/s 254 - Levy of interest u/s 234E - intimation of outstanding demand appealable order mentioned u/s 246A or not? - HELD THAT - Where assessee denies his liability to be assessed under an intimation under sub-section (1) of section 143, he can file an appeal before the CIT(A). Further, the Tribunal while deleting the interest levied u/s 234E of the Act has relied on various decisions of Hon ble High Courts. We find the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Telecom Limited. 2021 (12) TMI 211 - SUPREME COURT while deciding the powers of the Tribunal u/s 254(2). In view of the above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Telecom Limited cited 2021 (12) TMI 211 - SUPREME COURT the only course available to the Revenue is to approach the higher forum against the order of the Tribunal. Three Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue are dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
- Rectification of order passed by ITAT Pune
- Applicability of section 234E of the Income-tax Act
- Maintainability of appeal against intimation of outstanding demand
- Jurisdiction of ITAT to rectify orders

Analysis:

The judgment concerns the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune's decision on the rectification of an order allowing the appeal of the assessee based on the applicability of section 234E of the Income-tax Act. The Revenue filed Miscellaneous Applications requesting rectification under section 254(2) of the Act due to alleged mistakes in the Tribunal's order. The dispute revolved around the levy of Late Filing Fees under section 234E for the financial years 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15. The assessee challenged the interest levied under section 234E, leading to appeals before the CIT(A) and subsequently before the ITAT Pune.

The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal stating that the intimation of outstanding demand is not appealable under section 246A of the Act. The ITAT Pune, however, allowed the appeal of the assessee based on the non-applicability of section 234E prior to 01.06.2015, citing decisions of various High Courts. The Revenue, through Miscellaneous Applications, sought to rectify the ITAT's order, claiming errors in the decision. The assessee argued against the rectification, stating that the Tribunal's decision was correct and that the Revenue's applications were an attempt to review the order, which is impermissible.

The Tribunal examined the provisions of section 246A of the Act, emphasizing that an assessee can appeal against an order passed by a Joint Commissioner or an intimation under section 143. The ITAT's decision to delete the interest levied under section 234E was based on precedents set by High Courts. Citing a Supreme Court decision, the Tribunal reiterated that its powers under section 254(2) are limited to correcting mistakes apparent from the record and not beyond that. The Tribunal concluded that the Revenue should approach a higher forum if dissatisfied with the order, dismissing the Miscellaneous Applications.

In light of the above analysis, the Tribunal dismissed all three Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue, upholding its original decision in favor of the assessee.