Tribunal Upholds Late Filing Fees & Interest Levy

The Tribunal dismissed all appeals filed by the Assessee-Bank challenging the levy of late filing fees under section 234E of the Income Tax Act and interest under section 220(2) of the Act. The dispute centered on the retrospective application of section 200A for computing fees under section 234E. The Tribunal rejected the Assessee's arguments based on High Court decisions and emphasized that the Assessee failed to challenge the original orders in 2015 or demonstrate prejudice caused by the orders passed under section 154 of the Act. Time consumed in the current litigation was not counted towards the limitation period for filing appeals against the original orders of 2015.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging levy of late filing fees u/s 234E of the Income Tax Act along with interest u/s 220(2) of the Act. Interpretation of section 200A of the Act regarding the levy of fees u/s 234E prior to 01.06.2015. Comparison of decisions from different High Courts on the retrospective application of section 200A. Dispute between the machinery provision of section 200A and charging provision of section 234E. Appeal against the order passed u/s 154 of the Act and condonation of delay in filing appeals against original orders of 2015.

Analysis:
The appeals were filed by the Assessee-Bank challenging the orders of the CIT(A) dismissing their appeals against the TDS CPS Centre orders. The issue revolved around the levy of late filing fees u/s 234E of the Act and interest u/s 220(2) of the Act. The Assessee filed TDS returns belatedly, leading to the demand for late filing fees. The controversy stemmed from the interpretation of section 200A of the Act, specifically regarding the retrospective application of the provision for computing fees u/s 234E. The Assessee relied on the Karnataka High Court's decision, arguing that the amendment to section 200A was prospective from 01.06.2015, and demands prior to this date were not valid.

The Assessee also cited the Kerala High Court's decision and Tribunal benches following the Karnataka High Court's ruling. However, the Revenue relied on the Gujarat High Court's decision, emphasizing that section 200A is a machinery provision and section 234E is a charging provision, allowing the levy of fees without a specific provision in section 200A. The Tribunal analyzed the contentions, noting that the Assessee did not challenge the original orders passed u/s 200A of the Act in 2015. The Assessee's 2021 correction request for the exact amount due did not equate to challenging the original orders or rectification under section 154 of the Act.

The Tribunal highlighted that no appeal was filed against the demand raised u/s 234E in 2015, and the correction statement did not challenge the validity of the late filing fees. The Tribunal rejected the Assessee's argument that delay was due to non-receipt of original orders and directed the Assessee to explain any delay in future appeals. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, emphasizing that the Assessee failed to demonstrate prejudice caused by the orders passed u/s 154 of the Act. The Tribunal allowed time consumed in the current litigation not to count towards the limitation period for filing appeals against the original orders of 2015, subject to explanations for the remaining delay.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed all appeals, considering the identical circumstances in each case and the lack of merit in the Assessee's contentions. The judgment addressed the issues of challenging the levy of late filing fees, interpretation of section 200A, comparison of different High Court decisions, the interplay between machinery and charging provisions, appeal against section 154 orders, and condonation of delay in filing appeals against original orders of 2015.

---