G. B. BUILDERS, ,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT-CPC(TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Due Date On 24-11-2014, But Inadvertently Committed An Error Therein Of Depositing This Tds Using Pan Of The Seller Instead Of Pan Of The Appellant (As The Buyer)

3 of section 200 of the Act. In section 200A which deals with processing of the Statements prescribed the specific provision for levy of fee under section 234E was inserted w. e. f. 1.6. 2015. The main grievance of the appellant is that though section 234E came into effect w.e.f. 1.6. 2012 but since the enabling provision for computation

ANUKOOL FURNITURE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CPC -TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Years : 2015-16 Anukool Furniture Pvt Ltd Acit, B-12, Doctor House, Nr. Parimal Vs Cpc-Tds, Railway Crossing, Ellisbridge, Ghaziabad Ahmedabad-380006 Pan : Aabca 6053 F अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" "त् यथ" "त् यथ"/ (Respondent) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "त् "त् यथ" यथ" Assessee By : Shri Bharat Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/11/2021 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/11/2021 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Rajpal Yadav: The Assessee Is In Appeal Before The Tribunal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-8, Ahmedabad [“Cit(A) In Short] Dated 25Th January 2019 Passed For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Solitary Grievance Of The Assessee Is That The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Penalty Of Rs.74,000/- Which Was Imposed Under Section 234E Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. With The Assistance Of The Learned Representatives, We Have Gone Through The Record Carefully. It Emerges Out From The Record That The Assessee Failed To Submit Its Tds Return Well In Time During The Accounting Period Relevant To The Assessment Year 2015-16. Therefore, A Penalty Under Section 234E Of The Act Amounting To Rs.74,000/- Was Imposed Upon The Assessee. Anukool Furniture Pvt Ltd Vs. Acit Ay : 2015-16 2

Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. With the assistance of the learned representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. It emerges out from the record that the assessee failed to submit its TDS

M/S. ORION STEEL CORPORATION,ANAND vs. THE ACIT.,CPC-TDS, GHAZIYABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2432/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15(26Q, Q1)) M/S. Orion Steel Corporation The Acit बनाम/ Centralized Processing 58, Ajanta Station Road, Vs. Cell-Tax Deducted At Anand, Gujarat-388001 Source, Income Tax Office, Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziyabad, Uttar Pradesh-201010 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaafo3831D .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

TDS statement in Form No. 26Q for A.Y. 2014-15 (Quarter-1) which was processed under Section 200A on 24.03.2014 charging late fees under Section 234E at Rs. 48,600/-. Against the order passed under Section 200A r.w.s. 154 by CPC Ghaziabad, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Vadodara. The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed

M/S. ORION STEEL CORPORATION,ANAND vs. THE ACIT.,CPC-TDS, GHAZIYABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

TDS returns well within the time which were to be filed quarterly; hence a fine under Section 234E of the Income-tax Act was imposed for late filing of those returns in three quarters for Assessment Year 2014-15. Therefore, ITA No.2433/Ahd/2018 pertains to Quarter 2, ITA No.2434/Ahd/2018 pertains to Quarter 3

HARISH S DASANI,MUMBAI, ANDHERI(E) vs. TDS, CPC, AAYKAR BHAVAN, SECTOR- THREE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed, with the above observation

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

TDS Mumbai-400093 [PAN No.AAYPD0032F] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri P.D. Shah, A.R. Respondent by: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement 20.05.2024 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short

AMBANI BUILDERS PRIVATE LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

3. Cash deposit in the bank account arisen out of business transaction amounting to Rs.63,70,000/- a withdrawal from the bank (contra entries). 4. on account of adopting novel method to workout profit at 27.02% on closing stock of Rs.5,38,62,200/-,shown in books of account, and making addition on account of profit on closing stock

M/S. MAHAMANTRA TEXTILES MILLS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT, TDS,CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 476 & 477/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

TDS return with the aid of S-234E of the Act r.w.s. S-200A of the Act. In the captioned appeal, the assessee seeks to challenge the imposition of late filing fees imposed under s. 234E of the Act for default in furnishing statements contemplated under s. 200A r.w.r. 31A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 3. None appeared

M/S. MAHAMANTRA TEXTILES MILLS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT, TDS,CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 476 & 477/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15)

TDS return with the aid of S-234E of the Act r.w.s. S-200A of the Act. In the captioned appeal, the assessee seeks to challenge the imposition of late filing fees imposed under s. 234E of the Act for default in furnishing statements contemplated under s. 200A r.w.r. 31A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 3. None appeared

CHIMANLAL KATHIRIYA,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT - CPC - TDS WARD , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 388/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23)

3. This appeal is directed against the penalty of Rs.15,150/- imposed under Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for late filing of TDS

BHIKHABHAI HIRABHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 04 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Smt. Madhumita Roy

3 - 5. In parity, the main grounds of appeal of the assessee are dismissed. 6. We now advert to the additional ground raised by the assessee as under: “1. The deduction of TDS at 1% u/s. 194IA(1) is not applicable in respect of transfer of immovable property of less than Rs. 50 Lakhs by any person being transferee. Section

STRATEGIC INFOSYSTEMS PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

3,88,761/-only due to the inadvertent mistake of the assessee while filling the challan, wherein by mistake, tick was made in the code “(107) Tax on Distributed Income to Unit Holders” instead of code “(106) Tax on Distributed Profits of Domestic Companies)”. The counsel for the assessee submitted that it may be noted that the payment of dividend