Tribunal allows appeal on late fees for TDS returns, stresses separate rectification applications.

The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal against late fees charged under section 234E for TDS returns filed for multiple financial years. The dismissal of the appeal was based on procedural grounds, but the Tribunal emphasized the need for separate rectification applications for each intimation. The delay of 112 days in filing the appeal was condoned due to extenuating circumstances, including the impact of Covid situations and lockdown. The Tribunal clarified the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to entertain rectification applications under section 154, directing the officer to consider the applications on merit without jurisdictional constraints.

---

---

Issues Involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are:
1. Dismissal of appeal by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against late fees charged under section 234E by the CPC for TDS returns filed for multiple financial years.
2. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
3. Jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to entertain rectification applications under section 154 of the Act.

Issue 1: Dismissal of Appeal Against Late Fees:
The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee against the late fees charged under section 234E for TDS returns filed for different financial years. The dismissal was based on the grounds that the appellant filed a single appeal for several intimations pertaining to three different financial years, which was not appreciated as only one appeal can be filed against a single rectification order. However, it was argued that the rectification request made by the assessee was not a mere letter but a valid application under section 154. The Income Tax Officer's refusal to allow rectification was challenged, citing that the fee under section 234E was prospective from 01-06-2015 and no fee could be computed for periods prior to that date. Consequently, the assessee was not liable to pay the fees for late filing of TDS for the specified financial years.

Issue 2: Condonation of Delay:
There was a delay of 112 days in filing the appeal, which the assessee sought to condone. The delay was attributed to various factors, including the impact of Covid situations and lockdown. The delay was ultimately condoned after considering the reasons provided by the assessee and the circumstances surrounding the delay.

Issue 3: Jurisdiction of Assessing Officer for Rectification Applications:
The case involved the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to entertain rectification applications under section 154 of the Act. The assessee had filed a single rectification application against multiple intimations issued by the CPC. The Assessing Officer declined to entertain the application, stating it was not within his purview. However, a combined reading of Section 154 and Section 116 of the Act indicated that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer had the authority to entertain such applications. The Tribunal directed the assessee to file separate rectification applications against each intimation and instructed the Assessing Officer to dispose of the applications on merit without raising jurisdictional issues.

This judgment addresses the dismissal of an appeal against late fees, the condonation of delay in filing the appeal, and the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to entertain rectification applications. The Tribunal allowed the appeal partly for statistical purposes, emphasizing the need for separate rectification applications for each intimation and directing the Assessing Officer to consider them on merit without jurisdictional constraints.

---