AYNGARAN INTERNATIONAL FILMS PVT LTD.,CHENNAI V. ITO, NON CORP WARD 10(60, CHENNAI

ITA 3846/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ayngaran International Films Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting the imposition of late fees under section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for delayed filing of TDS returns in Forms 24Q and 26Q for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2015-16. The appeals were consolidated due to the similarity of issues and facts across the cases. The primary legal contention was whether the late fees imposed were applicable retrospectively, given that the relevant amendment to section 200A(1)(c) was introduced after the due dates for the returns in question. The Tribunal, referencing a decision by the Madras High Court, ruled in favor of the appellant, leading to the deletion of the late fees.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 839832 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 17-12-2025
• Other Referred Cases: True Blue Voice India (P.) Ltd. v. CCIT(TDS) 472 ITR 480
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: Y. SRIDHAR; F
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Question of law; TDS

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’बी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी एस.आर. रगुनाथॎ, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3845 & 3846 and 3847 & 3848/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Years: 2013-14 and 2015-16 Ayngaran International Films Pvt. Ltd., No. 147/11, Third Floor, Rajparis Trimeni Towers, G.N. Chetty Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. [PAN: AAECA9531F] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 10(6), Chennai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Y. Sridhar, F.C.A. ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl.CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 18.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 24.02.2026 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This four appeals filed by the assessee are directed against different orders all dated 25.09.2025 passed by the All./JCIT(A)-2, Japur for the assessment years 2013-14[24Q for Q4 & 26Q for Q4] and 2015-16 [24Q for Q4 & 26Q for Q4] passed under section 200A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 2. Since issues raised in these the appeals of the assessee are similar based on the same identical facts, with the consent of both the parties, Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3845 to 3848/Chny/25 2 we proceed to hear the appeals together and pass consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 3. First, we shall take appeal in ITA No. 3845/Chny/2025 [24Q for Q4] AY 2013-14 for adjudication. 4. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 17 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admit the appeal for adjudication. 5. At the outset, the ld. AR Shri Y Sridhar, F.C.A. drew our attention to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of True Blue Voice India (P.) Ltd. v. CCIT(TDS) 472 ITR 480 and submits that imposition of late fee for delay in furnishing statement under section 234E of the Act is not retrospective and not applicable prior to 01.06.2015. Thus, he prayed to follow the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras and delete the penalty levied under section 234E of the Act. 6. The ld. DR Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl. CIT submits that the provisions of section 234E of the Act has been introduced with effect from Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3845 to 3848/Chny/25 3 01.07.2012 prescribing for charging of a fee for every day of default in filing of statement under clause (c) of section 200A of the Act and the fee, if any, shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of section 234E of the Act. Thus, she prayed to confirm the order of the ld. CIT(A). 7. Having heard both the parties, we note that the assessee filed TDS returns in Form 24Q for Quarter-4 of FY 2012-13 belatedly on 20.03.2015 while the due date for filing such form was 15.05.2013. The CPC Bengaluru processed Form 24Q under section 200A of the Act and tax demanded at ₹.51,500/- towards late fee under section 234E of the Act. The first appellate authority confirmed the fee levied under section 234E of the Act. We have perused the case law relied on by the ld. AR in the case of True Blue Voice India (P.) Ltd. v. CCIT(TDS) (supra), wherein, substantial question of law on similar facts has been raised. The Hon’ble High of Madras was pleased to hold that there was no mechanism available for determination of late fee payable under section 234E of the Act at the time of processing TDS statements and thus, amendment was inserted under sub-section (1)(c) of section 200A of the Act w.e.f. 01.06.2015 for computation of fee payable under section 234E of the Act at the time of processing of TDS statement under section 200A of the Act. The Hon’ble High Court further held that the said amendment under sub- Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3845 to 3848/Chny/25 4 section (1)(c) of section 200A of the Act is not retrospective. Respectfully following the above decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of True Blue Voice India (P.) Ltd. v. CCIT(TDS) (supra), the late fee levied by the CPC under section 234E of the Act for the FY 2012-13 relevant to AY 2013-14 and confirmed by the first appellate authority stands deleted. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. ITA No. 3846/Chny/2025 [26Q for Q4] AY 2013-14 8. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 17 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admit the appeal for adjudication. 9. We find that the facts relating to levy of late fee for belated filing of TDS returns in Form 26Q for the quarter-4 is similar to the TDS returns in Form 24Q for the quarter-4 in ITA No. 3845/Chny/2025 wherein, the late fee levied under section 234E of the Act is deleted by following the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of True Blue Voice India (P.) Ltd. v. CCIT (supra) in the above Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3845 to 3848/Chny/25 5 mentioned paragraphs and the same finding is applicable equally to the case in hand in ITA No. 3846/Chny/2025 [26Q for Q4]. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. ITA Nos. 3847 & 3848/Chny/2025[26Q for Q4 and 24Q for Q4] AY 2015-16 10. We find that both the appeals are filed with a delay of 17 days. The assessee filed affidavits for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeals in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admits the appeal for adjudication. 11 We find that the facts relating to levy of late fee for belated filing of TDS returns in both Form 26Q for the quarter-4 and Form 24Q for the quarter -4 for AY 2015-16 is similar to the assessment year 2013- 14 and the findings given herein above in ITA Nos. 3845 & 3846/Chny/2025 are applicable equally to the case in hand for AY 2015-16. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals are allowed. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3845 to 3848/Chny/25 6 12. In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced on 24th February, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 24.02.2026 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "