Section 272A(2)(k)

Section 272A(2)(k) — the law in short

What the courts have decided on section 272A(2)(k), in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.

• Rajesh Kourani v Union of India High CourtHelps departmentHigh Courts differ
  Is there High Court authority that the s.234E fee runs from 1 July 2012 whatever the 2015 amendment to s.200A did, and does paying the fee buy me out of s.271H penalty?
  Yes on the first, no on the second. The Gujarat High Court held that s.234E is the charging provision and s.200A merely machinery, that a machinery provision cannot override a charging provision, and that even before 1 June 2015 the Revenue could always calculate and collect the fee. It also held, against Karnataka, that the s.234E fee is not in lieu of the s.271H penalty — the two are independent levies.
• Star Quenchers Spirit Pvt Ltd v JCIT (TDS), Nashik ITATHelps departmentNo later treatment found
  My quarterly TDS and TCS statements for 2010-11 were filed late and the JCIT has levied penalty at Rs 100 a day under section 272A(2)(k). No tax was lost. Is that a defence?
  No. The Pune Bench upheld a penalty of Rs 1,09,304 under section 272A(2)(k) read with section 200(3), holding that the absence of loss to the Revenue does not mean the deductor may skip the obligation to file quarterly statements within the statutory time. It followed the Allahabad High Court in Raja Harpal Singh Inter College v PCIT, noting that no decision of the jurisdictional High Court had been brought to its notice.
• Kooud Software P Ltd v DDIT (CPC) - TDS ITATHelps taxpayerHigh Courts differ
  The CIT(A) has confirmed my pre-June-2015 s.234E fee by following the Gujarat High Court, even though my jurisdictional High Court has decided the other way. Is the Tribunal bound to follow my own High Court?
  Yes. The Bangalore Bench held that the Karnataka High Court's decision in Fatheraj Singhvi is the binding decision of the jurisdictional High Court, and deleted the s.234E fee for all nine quarters, notwithstanding that the CIT(A) had preferred the Gujarat High Court's contrary decision in Rajesh Kourani. The fee under s.234E cannot be levied without the machinery provision of s.200A.
• Statutory position — s.271H replaced s.272A(2)(k) for TDS and TCS statements from 1 July 2012 CBDT Circulars & InstructionsCuts both ways
  The TDS officer has levied a penalty for a late quarterly statement. Which section applies — the daily penalty in section 272A(2)(k) or section 271H — and what gets me out of it?
  It depends on when the tax was deducted or collected. For tax deducted or collected before 1 July 2012 the penalty is under section 272A(2)(k) at Rs 100 for every day of default, capped by the proviso at the amount of tax deductible or collectible. For tax deducted or collected on or after 1 July 2012 the second proviso to section 272A(2) bars that penalty altogether and section 271H applies instead — a sum of not less than Rs 10,000 and up to Rs 1,00,000, directed by the Assessing Officer, with an escape in section 271H(3) which since 1 April 2025 requires the statement to have been filed within ONE MONTH of the prescribed time, not one year.

Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.