PASCHION RESTAURANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , GHAZIABAD

ITA 1940/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Paschion Restaurants Private Limited appealing against a penalty imposed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad, for late filing of a TDS return under section 234E of the Income Tax Act. The penalty was contested on the grounds that the applicable provisions for such a penalty were not in effect during the relevant assessment year (2013-14). The CIT(A) had previously dismissed the appeal, but the Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments, citing the introduction date of the relevant provisions and the inconsistency in applying penalties for other quarters of the same year.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 669225 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NARPAT SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: RUPINDER SHAH
• Keywords: Rule of consistency; TDS

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1940/Del/2025 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14) Paschion Restaurants Private Limited, GF 2, D-2, Southern Park, Saket, New Delhi-110017. PAN:AAFCP0487L Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ghaziabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘the CIT(A) in short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 20.12.2024 for Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Brief facts of the case are that in the present case, penalty of Rs.54,400/- was levied u/s 234E of the Act. Before us, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that ld. CIT(A) though had condoned the delay in filing the appeal, however, dismissed the appeal of the assessee by ignoring the fact that under identical circumstances late fee penalty levied for various other quarters of the year under appeal were deleted by Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 28.12.2024. The copies of said orders are placed on record. He further submits that by following rule of consistency the penalty levied for the quarter for this quarter also deserves to be deleted. On merits, it is submitted that the provisions for levy of penalty u/s 234E was inserted w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and the quarter under appeal is much prior to that thus the said provisions are Assessee by CA Rupinder Shah Department by Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing 24.06.2025 Date of pronouncement 24.06.2025 2 IT No.1940/Del/2025 Paschion Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT not applicable and therefore, even on merits no late fee could be levied. He prayed accordingly. 3. On the contrary, the Ld. Sr. DR supports the order of the lower authorities. 4. Heard both the parties, it is seen that the appellant has filed TDS return delayed and, therefore, the AO has imposed levy late fee penalty u/s 234E of the Act. The said enabling sub-clause (c) was inserted in section 200A(1) w.e.f. 01.06.2015 and, therefore, any delay in filing the quarterly return of TDS prior to that date, question of imposing of late fee for such delay in filing of statements of TDS is not attracted. This view is supported by the judgment of various hon’ble High courts and Co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal. Looking to these facts and also considering the fact that in assessee’s own case for other quarters of the impugned year, the late fee penalty u/s 234E was deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). Thus, by following the rule of consistency, we find that the late fee penalty levied for this quarter is not maintainable. It is also seen that late fee penalty is related to the quarter prior to 01.06.2015 when the provisions of section 200A(1)(c) was not introduced. Accordingly, the late fee penalty of Rs. 54,400/- is not maintainable even on merits accordingly the same is hereby deleted. All the ground of appeal taken by the assessee are allowed. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24.06.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (MANISH AGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 26.06.2025. PK/Sr. Ps Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "