Tribunal Admits Belated Appeals, Condoning Delay - Fee Imposition Clarified

The tribunal admitted the belated appeals for adjudication on merits, condoning the 255-day delay attributed to a reasonable cause. Regarding the fee charged under section 234E of the Act for late filing of TDS statements, the tribunal held that prior to 01.06.2015, section 200A did not empower fee imposition under section 234E. Citing judicial precedents and consistent tribunal decisions, the tribunal directed the Assessing Officer not to levy fees under section 234E for periods preceding 01.06.2015, aligning with the Karnataka High Court's stance.

---

---

Issues:
Delay in filing appeals, fee levied under section 234E of the Act

Delay in filing appeals:
The appeals were filed belatedly with a delay of 255 days. The assessee sought condonation of delay, attributing it to reasonable cause. After reviewing the application and affidavit, the tribunal found the delay justified and admitted the appeals for adjudication on merits.

Fee levied under section 234E of the Act:
The common issue in all appeals pertained to the fee charged under section 234E of the Act while processing TDS statements under section 200A for various quarters of Financial Year 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15. The Assessing Officer imposed fees for late filing of TDS statements under section 200A. The assessee challenged this levy, citing judicial precedents to support the claim that the fee under section 234E cannot be charged for periods before 01.06.2015. Despite the submissions, the CIT(A) upheld the levy, deeming the amendment to section 200A as clarificatory.

Detailed Analysis:
The tribunal noted that section 234E, allowing a fee for late TDS statement filing, was introduced in 2012, but no corresponding amendment empowered fee levy under section 200A until 2015. Prior to 01.06.2015, section 200A did not provide for the imposition of fees under section 234E. Various tribunal benches consistently held that pre-2015, section 200A did not allow fee imposition under section 234E. The Karnataka High Court and tribunal decisions supported this stance. In the absence of a jurisdictional High Court decision, the tribunal followed the Karnataka High Court's view and directed the AO not to charge fees under section 234E for periods preceding 01.06.2015.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment addresses the issues of delay in filing appeals and the fee levied under section 234E of the Act, providing a detailed breakdown of the tribunal's reasoning and decision-making process.

---