IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 2331/DEL/2017 (A.Y. 2016-17) Exotique Exports Vs. ACIT (CPC TDS) Z-45, Okhla Industrial Area, Aayakar Bhawan, Phase II, New Delhi- 110020 Sector 3, Vaishali PAN : AAAFE1843K Ghaziabad (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. Surendra Meena, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 08.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement 27.08.2019 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed against order dated 31.01.2017 passed by CIT(A)- 41, New Delhi for assessment year 2016-17. 2. Grounds of appeal are as under: 1. That under facts and circumstances of case, it was not justified on part of department to levy late filing fees u/s 234E of I.T.Act amounting to Rs. 12,800/- relevant to 2nd Quarter July 2015 to September 2015. That appellant had duly deposited total TDS with Bank and late filing of return was only procedural in nature and did not result into any loss of revenue. That appellant had reasonable cause for not filing return in time and no fee for late filing deserves to be levied. 2. That orders of lower authorities are not justified on facts and same are bad in law. 3. That assessee craves right to add, amend, delete or substitute any ground of appeal. 3. Order u/s 200A of Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 22.12.2015 was passed by ACIT, CPC-TDS in respect of levy of late filing fees u/s 234E of Income Tax Act. 4. Being aggrieved by Order u/s 200A of Income Tax Act, 1961, assessee filed appeal before CIT(A). CIT (A) dismissed appeal of assessee. 5. During hearing, despite filing power of attorney, none appeared for assessee nor was assessee present before us. Notice for hearing was properly issued and served upon assessee within time. Thus, service was complete, but since none is present on behalf of assessee, we are proceeding on basis of order u/s 200A of Act and order of CIT(A). 6. Ld. DR relied upon Order u/s 200A of Act and order of CIT(A). 7. We have heard Ld. DR and perused all relevant material available on record. CIT(A) held as under: 5.5 It is also worth mentioning that fee u/s 234E is required to be mandatorily paid by deductor at time of submission of TDS statement, calculated at rate of Rupees two hundred per day. There is no provision in Act which allows for waiver from payment of such fees on grounds like ones raised by appellant. Any such condonation of delay or leniency would mean punishing law abiding deductors who had duly calculated fees u/s 234E and paid same. Non levy of fee would mean punishing honest and rewarding guilty, which can never be intention of legislature. 5.6 In recent judgment Kerala High Court in case of Shree Narayana Guru Smarak Sangam Upper Primary School vs. UOI & Ors in December 2016 has further upheld levy of fee u/s 234E and has held that on account of additional work burden which has fallen upon department due to fault of deductor that fee has been levied. Hence claim of appellant that late filing was only procedural and did not result in any loss to Revenue has no bearing on levy of fee u/s 234E. 5.7 In light of above discussion and respectfully following decisions of various Hon ble High Courts in cases of Rashmikant Kundalia vs. Union of India 2015 (54) Taxman.com 200 (Bombay), Lakshminirman Bangalore (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad [(2015) 60 taxmann.com 144], M/s Dundlod Shikshan Sansthan vs. Union of India and Shree Narayana Guru Smarak Sangam Upper Primary School vs. UOI & Ors. cited supra, grounds grounds of appeal filed by appellant are dismissed. It is pertinent to note that assessee is admitting that late filing of TDS return was due to technical and procedural default and not on account of any withholding of TDS by assessee. Section 234E of Act clearly sets out that fee imposed under Section 234E is levied towards regularization of delay in filing of TDS return or statement; since Revenue department has to expend extra effort and resources for processing delayed TDS returns or statements and possibly also incurs additional burden of interest to be paid to assessee on whose account tax deduction has been made. fee imposed u/s 234E is for all intents and purposes late fee payable for accepting TDS/Statement/Return at belated point in time. Thus, there is no need to interfere with finding of CIT(A). appeal of assessee is dismissed. 7. In result, appeal of assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in Open Court on 27th August, 2019. Sd/- Sd/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 27/08/2019 *Binita* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI Date of dictation .08.2019 Date on which typed draft is placed before .08.2019 dictating Member Date on which typed draft is placed before Other Member Date on which approved draft comes to Sr. PS/PS Date on which fair order is placed before Dictating Member for pronouncement Date on which fair order comes back to Sr. PS/PS Date on which final order is uploaded on website of ITAT Date on which file goes to Bench Clerk Date on which file goes to Head Clerk Exotique Exports v. ACIT (CPC TDS), Ghaziabad