ITAT Hyderabad remands delayed Section 234E appeals for fresh decision on condonation

1. Background of the dispute

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, considered three connected appeals filed by Infinio Techsole (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad) for Assessment Year 2013-14, relating to Quarter 2 to Quarter 4. All three matters arose out of separate appellate orders dated 11.12.2025 passed by the Addl/JCIT(A), Raipur.

Common facts and issues were involved, so the Tribunal combined the hearing and passed a single consolidated order covering all three appeals.

The controversy in the appeals had its genesis in three independent orders dated 04.08.2023 passed by the Assessing Officer under section 154 read with section 200A of the Income Tax Act 1961, at the time of processing quarterly TDS statements in Form No. 26Q.

While the assessee had raised various legal and factual challenges, the Tribunal ultimately confined itself to the limited question of delay in filing first appeals before the Addl/JCIT(A) and the absence of affidavits at that stage.

2. Issues raised by the assessee in appeal

For reference, the Tribunal reproduced the grounds from ITA No.593/Hyd/2026, which broadly captured the assessee’s objections. In essence, the assessee had challenged:

  • The dismissal of the appeal in limine by the appellate authority under section 250 for non-condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
  • The validity and jurisdiction of the orders passed by the Assessing Officer under section 154 read with section 200A.
  • Alleged breach of principles of natural justice in the appellate proceedings.
  • Levy of late filing fee of Rs. 30,824 under section 234E for delay in filing the TDS return.
  • Levy of interest of Rs. 25,256 under section 220(2) on account of non-payment of the section 234E late filing fee.

The assessee also reserved the right to modify, add or delete grounds as needed.

While these grounds go to both jurisdiction and merits of the adjustments made during TDS processing, the Tribunal chose not to adjudicate them at this stage. The focus was on whether the first appellate authority was justified in rejecting the appeals purely on the ground of absence of supporting affidavits to explain the delay.

3. Factual matrix leading to delay issue

3.1 Orders of the Assessing Officer

  • The Assessing Officer passed three distinct orders dated 04.08.2023 under section 154 read with section 200A.
  • These orders related to processing of quarterly TDS statements in Form No. 26Q for Quarter 2, Quarter 3, and Quarter 4 of the financial year corresponding to Assessment Year 2013-14.
  • In the course of such processing, late filing fee under section 234E and consequential interest under section 220(2) were levied.

3.2 First appeals before Addl/JCIT(A)

  • The assessee later preferred appeals against all three orders before the Addl/JCIT(A), Raipur.
  • There was admitted delay in filing each of these first appeals.
  • The assessee apparently filed petitions seeking condonation of delay, but no supporting affidavits were submitted along with such petitions at that time.

Observing the absence of affidavits or any sworn explanation for the delay, the Addl/JCIT(A) declined to condone the delay and dismissed all three appeals in limine, without dealing with the grounds on merits.

As a result, the substantive challenges to section 154 / section 200A jurisdiction, section 234E fee, and section 220(2) interest remained entirely unexamined at the first appellate stage.

4. Arguments before the ITAT

4.1 Submissions of the assessee

Before the Tribunal, the Learned Authorised Representative (Ld.