Procedural lapse in electronic ST-3 filing did not justify late fee or penalty where delay was unintentional.

Delayed electronic filing of ST-3 returns was treated as a procedural lapse rather than a deliberate default where the returns had been prepared in the system but not finally submitted. The tribunal noted the initial difficulties in electronic filing and accepted that the delay was unintentional. On that basis, late fee and penalty were held unjustified and the demand was set aside with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether late fee and penalty were leviable for delayed electronic filing of ST-3 returns where the returns had been prepared in the system but were not finally submitted.

Analysis: The returns had been taken up to the 'save' stage in the electronic filing system, and the delay in final submission was found to be unintentional. The order also took note of the initial teething problems in electronic filing and the appellant's limited capability as a semi-literate service provider. In these circumstances, the lapse was treated as procedural rather than deliberate, and the levy of late fee and penalty was not justified.

Conclusion: The demand of late fee and the penalty were unsustainable and were set aside with consequential relief.

---