आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”ए” (cid:586)ायपीठ पुणेम(cid:336)।

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.136 to 141/PUN/2025 िनधार(cid:6981) ण वष (cid:6981) / Assessment Years: 2013-14 Gurunath Shambhi Vernekar, V The Income Tax Officer, Office NO.113, Gagan Enclave, s TDS-1, Pune.

Gangadham Road, Bibwewadi, Pune – 411037.

Maharashtra.

PAN: PNEGO6309C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Sarang Gudhate and Advocate-M.Ashvini – AR’s Revenue by Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - DR Date of hearing 23/04/2025 Date of pronouncement 29/04/2025 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:

These six appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, all dated 13.12.2024. Assessee has filed identical grounds for all these years. Since the issue involved is common, all these appeals were heard together and decided by the common order. We treat Appeal in ITA No.136/PUN/2025 as lead case. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :

“1. The Ld ACIT, CPC-TDS is not justified in law and in facts and circumstances of the case in levy of late filing fee u/s 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The statutory provision of sec 200A was inserted by Finance Act 2015 w.e.f 01/06/2015 with prospective effect. Accordingly, the amendment to section 200A (1) of the Act is procedural in nature. Thus, for the period prior to 01.06.2015, the Assessing officer was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Hence, the levy of the late filing fees in the intimation order passed under section 200A is bad in law and be deleted.

2. Under the facts and Circumstances of case and in law, Ld CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing appeal despite of the fact that appeal is filed on legal ground.

3. The appellant craves the permission to add, amend, modify, alter, revise, substitute, delete any or all grounds of appeal if deemed necessary at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

Brief facts of the case :

2. In the case of the assessee, an order u/s.200A of the Act, was passed on 02.10.2016 for Quarter-4 of Financial Year 2012-13 levying late fee u/s.234E of the Act of Rs.12,200/-. As per the said order, Assessee had filed Quarterly Statement on 15.07.2013. Assessee filed an appeal before ld.CIT(A) on 16.08.2024 with a delay of 2845 days. Ld.CIT(A) held that there was no sufficient cause for delay and hence dismissed the appeal.

2.1 Aggrieved by the order, Assessee filed appeal before this Tribunal.

Submission of ld.AR :

3. Ld.AR, Advocate Ashwini and CA-Sarang Gudhate filed a paper book. Ld.AR for the assessee relied upon the following case laws :

 Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors.

 Sitaldas K. Motwani Vs. Director General of Income Tax  Jiji Varghese Vs. Income Tax Officer & Ors. (Kerala HC)

3.1 Ld.AR submitted that ITAT Pune in various cases has held that 234E late fee is applicable w.e.f. 01.06.2015. In the case of the assessee, Department has levied 234E late fee for the F.Y.2012-13 which is not sustainable as held by ITAT Pune. However, ld.CIT(A) has not condoned the delay. Ld.AR submitted that on merits, Assessee should get relief.

Submission of ld.DR :

4. Ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order of the ld.CIT(A). The ld.DR relied on the order of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Rajesh Kourani Vs. Union of India 297 CTR 502 (Gujarat), wherein Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has held as under :

“Even in absence of section 200A of the Act with introduction of section 234E, it was always open for the Revenue to demand and collect the fee for late filing of the statements. Section 200A would merely regulate the manner in which the computation of such fee would be made and demand raised. In other words, we cannot subscribe to the view that without a regulatory provision being found for s