Tribunal Rules in Favor of Taxpayers on Late Filing Fees; Upholds Fees for FY 2015-2016

The Tribunal allowed the appeals for FY 2013-2014 and FY 2014-2015, directing the deletion of late filing fees under Section 234E as the AO lacked authority before 01.06.2015. However, for FY 2015-2016 (3rd and 4th quarters), late fees were upheld post-amendment. The final order allowed appeals in ITA Nos. 440 to 447/CTK/2019 and dismissed appeals in ITA Nos. 448 & 449/CTK/2019, pronounced on 25/02/2020.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Levy of late filing fees under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act.
2. Application of the amendment to Section 200A of the Income Tax Act effective from 01.06.2015.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

Levy of Late Filing Fees under Section 234E:
The primary issue in these appeals is the levy of late filing fees under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act. The assessee, a private limited company, filed its TDS returns for various quarters of the financial years 2013-2014, 2014-2015, and 2015-2016 belatedly. Consequently, the ACIT (CPC-TDS), Ghaziabad raised demands for late filing fees. The demands for the respective quarters and assessment years were as follows:

- For FY 2013-2014, the delays ranged from 156 to 464 days, with demands ranging from Rs. 31,200 to Rs. 78,480.
- For FY 2014-2015, the delays ranged from 137 to 441 days, with demands ranging from Rs. 27,400 to Rs. 88,280.
- For FY 2015-2016, the delays were 78 and 88 days, with demands of Rs. 15,600 and Rs. 17,600, respectively.

The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeals, upholding the late filing fees. The assessee then appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

Application of the Amendment to Section 200A Effective from 01.06.2015:
The ITAT examined whether the levy of fees under Section 234E was permissible before the amendment to Section 200A, which came into effect on 01.06.2015. The Tribunal referred to the decision in the case of Glee Pharma Pvt. Ltd., where it was held that the Assessing Officer (AO) did not have the authority to levy fees under Section 234E while processing statements under Section 200A before 01.06.2015. This view was supported by the Karnataka High Court in Fatehraj Singhvi v. Union of India, which ruled that the amendment to Section 200A empowering the AO to levy fees under Section 234E was prospective and not retrospective.

The Tribunal also considered the decision in Govt. High School, Unit-VI, Bhubaneswar, where it was held that late fees under Section 234E could not be levied for periods prior to 01.06.2015. The Tribunal noted that the amendment to Section 200A, which allowed for the computation of late fees under Section 234E, was effective from 01.06.2015 and did not have retrospective effect.

Conclusion:
Based on these precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the AO could not levy late fees under Section 234E for the periods before 01.06.2015. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and directed the AO to delete the fees levied under Section 234E for the quarters of FY 2013-2014 and FY 2014-2015.

However, for the quarters of FY 2015-2016 (3rd and 4th quarters), which were after the amendment date, the Tribunal upheld the levy of late fees under Section 234E, as the AO was authorized to do so post-01.06.2015.

Judgment:
- Appeals for FY 2013-2014 and FY 2014-2015: The Tribunal allowed the appeals and directed the deletion of late filing fees under Section 234E.
- Appeals for FY 2015-2016 (3rd and 4th quarters): The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, upholding the levy of late filing fees under Section 234E.

Final Order:
The appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 440 to 447/CTK/2019 were allowed, and the appeals in ITA Nos. 448 & 449/CTK/2019 were dismissed. The order was pronounced in the open court on 25/02/2020.

---