Delay in Appeal against TDS CPC order downloaded after two years condoned as the order was never served on assessee
ABACUS Case Law Citation
ABCAUS 3352 (2020) (08) ITAT
In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) in confirming the late fee for default in belated filing of TDS statement/Returns under section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) by the TDS CPC.
The TDS CPC had passed the order more than two years ago. However, according to the assessee no such order was communicated to it. It was only when the assessee came to know about the order from the TDS CPC website and the order was downloaded thereafter.
However, the CIT(A) was of the opinion that in the case of TDS returns, the Department had digitised its system for proessing of TDS returns and on processing of the same the intimation containing the demand, if any, gets automatically communicated to assessee through e-mail or message.
Thus the CIT(A) was of the view that the assessee, therefore, could have downloaded the said intimation immediately after said order was passed.
The CIT(A) refused to condone the delay in filing the appeal and dismissed the appeals exparte, holding that there was no valid grounds to condone the delay.
Before the Tribunal, the assessee submitted that the date of communication of the order had to be taken when the order was downloaded and reckoning of the limitation for filing the appeal should have been from that date only.
According to the assessee the appeals preferred were well within the time but the CIT(A) failed to consider the same in proper perspective.
The assessss submitted that it did not receive any communication immediately after passing of the order two years ago, but it was only after verifying from the portal, the assessee came to know that such an order had been passed and, therefore, downloaded the order and filed the appeals well within the period of limitation from
The Tribunal observed that the fact of the non-service of order stood unrebutted as it was not contended otherwise by the Revenue or proved by producing any material to show the service of such order on the assessee.
The Tribunal stated that the assessee does not stand to gain by filing the appeal with considerable delay when the demand was raised under law.
Having regard to the facts, course of natural events, human conduct, the Tribunal opined that the explanation offered by the assessee was an acceptable one.
Further, the Tribunal stated that when the technicalities are pitted against the substantial justice, the former must give way to the later.
Accordingly, the Tribunal condoned the delay and the impugned order was set-aside and remanded to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Mere CBDT Instructions cannot absolve individuals of their obligation to explain the source and nature of their gold holdings, even…
Empanelment of General Observers for ICSI Examinations December 2026 ICSI has invited interested members to enroll as General Observers for…
ITAT answers some important and inter-related issues relating to deduction u/s 80IA In a recent judgment, ITAT has dealt with…
Carry forward of loss can not be denied for belated return, it is only the set off in subsequent year…
Where sales are duly recorded in books and VAT returns, to treat it bogus sales, AO must bringing cogent adverse…
Expenses to celebrate Diwali with staff creates a goodwill and, therefore amounts to expenses incurred for the purpose of business…