M/S. GHANI RASHEED & CO.,CHENNAI V. DCIT, NCC-4(1), CHENNAI

ITA 3766/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by M/s. Ghani Rasheed & Co. against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which confirmed the late fees levied by the Assessing Officer for the belated filing of TDS returns in Form 26Q for the third and fourth quarters of the assessment year 2013-14. The tribunal consolidated the appeals due to the similarity of issues and facts. The primary legal contention was the applicability of the late fee under section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was challenged based on the non-retrospective nature of the amendment to section 200A introduced in 2015.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 842271 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 10-12-2025
• Other Referred Cases: True Blue Voice India (P.) Ltd. v. CCIT(TDS) 472 ITR 480 (Mad)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: S. GIRISH KUMAR
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Question of law; TDS
• Section: 154

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.3766 and 3767/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2013-14 [26Q – Q3 & 26Q – Q4] M/s. Ghani Rasheed & Co., 1/2, Kattur Sadayappan Street, Periamet, Chennai 600 003. [TAN:CHEG12362A] Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri S. Girish Kumar, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 17.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.02.2026 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against separate orders both dated 15.09.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2013-14 [26Q – Q3 & 26Q – Q4]. 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.3766 & 3767/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. 3766/Chny/2025 [26Q for Q3] AY 2013-14 for adjudication. 4. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 10 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 admits the appeal for adjudication. 5. At the outset, we note that the Assessing Officer levied late fees of ₹.2,66,040/- for 26Q – quarter-3 vide his order dated 21.02.2025 under section 154 r.w.s. 200A/206CB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short], which were challenged before the ld. CIT(A), wherein, by passing exparte order, he confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. 6. Having heard both the parties, we note that the Assessing Officer levied late fees of ₹.2,66,040/- vide his order dated 21.02.2025 under section 154 r.w.s. 200A/206CB of the Act for 26Q – quarter-3 at ₹.2,66,040/- for belated filing of Form 26Q – Quarter-3. The ld. CIT(A) Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3766 & 3767/Chny/25 3 confirmed the same. 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) 472 ITR 480 (Mad), 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-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 for 26Q – Q-3 under section 234E of the Act for the FY 2012-13 relevant to AY 2013-14 and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) stands deleted. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. I.T.A. No. 3767/Chny/2025 – AY 2013-14 [26Q -Q4] 7. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 10 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 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3766 & 3767/Chny/25 4 find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admits the appeal for adjudication. 8. 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. 3766/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 mentioned paragraphs and the same finding is applicable equally to the case in hand in ITA No. 3767/Chny/2025 [26Q for Q4]. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. 8. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced on 25th February, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 25.02.2026 Vm/- Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.3766 & 3767/Chny/25 5 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 "