Income Tax Appeal Case: Abhishek Malhotra vs ITO Ward-73(1) for Assessment Year 2014-15

Income Tax Appeal Case: Abhishek Malhotra vs ITO Ward-73(1) for Assessment Year 2014-15

The case ITA No.1410/Del/2022, involving an appeal filed by Abhishek Malhotra against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, pertains to the assessment year 2014-15. This detailed analysis covers the background, proceedings, and final judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘A’.

Background of the Case

Abhishek Malhotra, the appellant, contested the late fees charged under section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the delayed filing of TDS returns for the financial years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The late fees amounted to Rs.652,690, charged by the Central Processing Center (CPC) for various quarterly TDS returns filed post the specified due date, prior to June 1, 2015.

The appeal was primarily against the dismissal of his application for rectification by both the Income Tax Officer (ITO) of Ward-73(1), Delhi, and the subsequent rejection of his appeal by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The crux of the dispute lay in the application of section 234E, pertaining to late filing fees, and whether the application for rectification and the appeal could be considered valid.

Proceedings and Arguments

During the hearing, Malhotra’s representative argued on the misapplication of section 234E late fees, asserting that these charges were erroneously levied for periods before the effective date of June 1, 2015, for section 234E. Further, there was a contention regarding the right to appeal against multiple intimations through a single application, which was a significant point of procedural dispute.

The Income Tax Department, represented by their Senior Departmental Representative, maintained that each intimation issued under section 200A for different quarters constituted separate causes of action, thereby requiring individual rectification applications and appeals for each.

Judgment and Conclusion

The Tribunal, after considering the arguments and the provisions of the Income Tax Act, particularly sections 154 and 116, concluded that the appellant should have filed separate applications for rectification for each intimation received. However, it acknowledged the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to entertain the application under section 154 for rectification of mistakes apparent from the record.

The final judgment was ‘Partly Allowed’ for statistical purposes, directing the appellant to file separate rectification applications for each intimation and the Assessing Officer to adjudicate them without raising the issue of jurisdiction. This decision underscores the procedural aspects of filing appeals and rectification applications in tax disputes, along with the interpretation of the law pertaining to late filing fees under section 234E.

This comprehensive analysis and summary of ITA No.1410/Del/2022 provide insights into the proceedings and the interpretation of legal provisions in the context of income tax appeals. It sheds light on the importance of adherence to procedural requirements and the legal interpretations of statutory provisions.

Income Tax Appeal Case: Abhishek Malhotra vs ITO Ward-73(1) for Assessment Year 2014-15