, , आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण इंदौर (cid:586)ायपीठ इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.914 & 917/Ind/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 [Financial Year: 2012-13 / Q2-24Q & Q3-24Q)

M/s. Supreme Transport ITO TDS-II, Company, Indore

201, Vikram Tower, /

बनाम Sneh Nagar, Vs.

Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

PAN: AAUFS5010N Assessee by Shri Subhash Chand Jain, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 08.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 13.10.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

Feeling aggrieved by a consolidated order dated 28.09.2018 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-II, Indore [“CIT(A)”] disposing of two (2) Appeal Nos. IT-10019 & 10020/17-18, which in turn arise out of two (2) separate orders both dated 27.03.2017 and both passed by learned ITO(TDS)-II, Indore [“AO”] u/s 200(3) r.w.s. 234E of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Financial Year 2012-13 [Q-2/Form No. 24Q] and Financial Year 2012-13 [Q-3/Form No. 24Q], relevant to Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2013-

14, the assessee has filed the captioned two (2) appeals on the grounds mentioned in Form No. 36 (Appeal Memo).

2. This is the 2^nd round of litigation for the same issue. The brief facts to understand these cases are as under:

(i) The assessee/appellant filed Statements of TDS in Form No. 24Q for Q-2 & Q-3 of Financial Year 2012-13 after a delay of 81 days & 44 days respectively. The AO processed the Statements so filed through intimations dated 25.12.2013 u/s 200A wherein a late fee of Rs. 16,200/- u/s 234E [computed @ Rs. 200/- per day X 81 days = 16,200/-] and Rs. 6,000/- u/s 234E [computed @ Rs. 200/- per day X 44 days = 8,800/- restricted to amount of TDS – Rs. 6,000/-] were levied. Aggrieved by AO’s action, the assessee carried matters in first- appeals and claimed that prior to 01.06.2015, there was no power available to AO for charging late-fee u/s 234E. Vide order dated 08.12.2025, the CIT(A) disposed of assessee’s appeals and deleted late fee levied by AO accepting that the AO had no power to levy late fee in an intimation u/s 200A. The 1^st round ended here (ii) However, in the very same orders dated 08.12.2025, the CIT(A) also observed that the AO can pass a separate order for levy of late fee. Taking clue from those orders, the AO passed new orders dated 27.03.2017 but under different section of 200(3) r.w.s. 234E again levying the very same late fee of Rs. 16,200/- & Rs. 6,000/- u/s 234E. Aggrieved again, the assessee filed appeals to CIT(A). Vide order dated 28.09.2018, the CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeals upholding AO’s orders. Now, the assessee has come in these two appeals before ITAT challenging the orders of lower-authorities. Accordingly, this is

2^nd round

3. The Registry has informed that the present appeals have been filed by assessee on 25.12.2024 against order dated 28.09.2018 after a delay of 2218 days and therefore time-barred. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the assessee has filed a condonation-application supported by affidavit and prays for condonation of delay. Referring to contents of condonation- application/affidavit, Ld. AR submitted that the impugned order passed by CIT(A) was not served upon assessee and therefore the assessee was not aware of same and could not file appeal in time. Ultimately, when the department started recovery proceeding, the assessee downloaded the impugned order from web portal of department and immediately filed appeal without further delay. Ld. AR requested that there is a ‘sufficient cause’ of delay and hence the delay must be condoned and this appeal must be admitted and heard.

4. Ld. DR for revenue filed following letter sent by the office of CIT(Appeal), Unit-II, Indore:

5. Thus, in above letter, the revenue/respondent accepts that no entry or record of the delivery of order is available. In view of this, the claim of assessee regarding non-service of impugned