2018 (5) TMI 1636

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5 days and 78 days respectively in filing these appeals. The assessee has filed the application for condonation of delay which is supported by affidavit of the Assistant Engineer, Ajmer Vidhyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Srimadhopur, Sikar. 3. We have heard the ld. A/R as well as the ld. D/R on condonation of delay of 75 days/78 days respectively in filing these appeals. It is explained that the concerned employee who was handling the matter misplaced the impugned orders passed by the ld. CIT (A) and went on leave. After he returned from leave tried to search the orders but failed and thereafter finally the files along with the impugned orders were found. Hence it is explained that the delay in filing the appeals is neither intentional nor willfu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e case, when there is nothing to show that the assessee would have achieved any ulterior purpose by filing the present appeals belatedly, accordingly in the interest of justice we condone the delay of 75 days/78 days in filing these appeals. 5. The assessee has filed the common grounds in these appeals as under :- ITA No. 405/JP/2018 : " In the facts & circumstances of the case the ld. CIT Appeals, Ajmer has erred in not admitting the appeal for LATE FEES imposed u/s 234E Under clause (c) of sub section 1 of 200A. 1. The assessee has filed an appeal with ld. CIT (appeals) Ajmer against the intimation dated 20.8.2015 issued under section 200A of IT Act 1961 levying late filing Fee of Rs. 6600/- u/s 234 by ACIT, CPC (TDS) Ghaziabad (T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... TDS statement, which can be inferred from the provisions of Sec. 204 of the Act Section 204 particularly states that "for the purposes of Sec. 190 to Sec. 203 and for Sec. 285 of the Act the following persons would be responsible", so it is clear that for the purpose of Sec. 234E none of the person has been made responsible, therefore if any late fee is due and not deposited along with the TDS statement none can be held responsible to deposit it. In our case the deductor is Government so company as per law Government cannot be held responsible person to deposit it. 5. In the facts & circumstances of the case the learned A.O. erred in imposing late fee without appreciating the facts & circumstances of the case and hence the same should b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xplanation on behalf of the assessee. The ld. D/R has relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 7. Having considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record, we note that the ld. CIT (A) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee in limini by recording the finding in para 4 as under :- " 4. Thus, from the report of the AO, it is clear that the notice of demand was sent to the appellant on 20.08.2015 on the email [email protected] given by the appellant. As per Section 249(2), the appeal has to be presented within 30 days of date of service of notice of demand. The appellant has not filed the appeal within the period specified u/s 249(2). There is an inordinate delay in filing the appeal. I am of the con....