SURJIT MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ,FEROZEPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( EXEMPTIONS ) WARD, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS is liable to pay by way of fee a sum of Rs. 200/- per day during which the failure continues. Section 234E of the Act inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 1

SURJIT MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,FEROZEPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( EXEMPTIONS ) WARD, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS is liable to pay by way of fee a sum of Rs. 200/- per day during which the failure continues. Section 234E of the Act inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 1

GULMARG DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY ,BARAMULA vs. INCOME TAX OFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

section 234E. In support, the appellant has relied on following judicial pronouncements- 1. ITAT, Amritsar in the case of Sibia Healthcare Private Limited v DCIT (TDS

GULMARG DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY,BARAMULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

section 234E. In support, the appellant has relied on following judicial pronouncements- 1. ITAT, Amritsar in the case of Sibia Healthcare Private Limited v DCIT (TDS

GULMARG DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY ,BARAMULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS) , SRINAGAR

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

section 234E. In support, the appellant has relied on following judicial pronouncements- 1. ITAT, Amritsar in the case of Sibia Healthcare Private Limited v DCIT (TDS

KASHMIR DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. CPC TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS statements were filed on 22.08 2013. Thus, in our view, such a levy could only have been made at best within 31.03.2015 2015. However, the statements been processed on 16 2016 was beyond the. Of limitation specified in the provisions to section 200 A of the act. Thus, the time has already elapsed and this defect is thus

KASHMIR DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. CPC TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS statements were filed on 22.08 2013. Thus, in our view, such a levy could only have been made at best within 31.03.2015 2015. However, the statements been processed on 16 2016 was beyond the. Of limitation specified in the provisions to section 200 A of the act. Thus, the time has already elapsed and this defect is thus

M/S. IQBAL MEMORIAL TRUST ,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

TDS “8. statement and issuance of intimation under section 200A in respect thereof, an adjustment could also be made in respect of the “fee, if any, shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of section 234E”. There is no dispute that what is impugned in appeal before us is the intimation under section 200A of the Act, as stated

B D S TECHOLOGIES,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

1) of the Act. The second aspect of the issue raised in the set of appeals is charging of fees payable under section 234E of the Act prior to amendment to section 200A(l)(c) of the Act vide Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015, while processing the TDS

B D S TECHNOLOGIES ,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

1) of the Act. The second aspect of the issue raised in the set of appeals is charging of fees payable under section 234E of the Act prior to amendment to section 200A(l)(c) of the Act vide Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015, while processing the TDS

B D S TECHNOLOGIES,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

1) of the Act. The second aspect of the issue raised in the set of appeals is charging of fees payable under section 234E of the Act prior to amendment to section 200A(l)(c) of the Act vide Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015, while processing the TDS

B D S TECHNOLOGIES,AMRITSAR vs. INCME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

1) of the Act. The second aspect of the issue raised in the set of appeals is charging of fees payable under section 234E of the Act prior to amendment to section 200A(l)(c) of the Act vide Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015, while processing the TDS

B D S TECHNOLOGIES,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

1) of the Act. The second aspect of the issue raised in the set of appeals is charging of fees payable under section 234E of the Act prior to amendment to section 200A(l)(c) of the Act vide Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015, while processing the TDS

KC SOCIAL WELFARE TRUST (REGD),NAWANSHAHR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER . TDS., JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the demand under Section 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period of the respective assessment year prior

RAJOURI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,RAJOURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant filed rectification application u/s 154 requesting to delete late filing fee levied u/s 234E. The AO rejected this request of the appellant by passing order dated.18.03.2020. It is observed that the appellant filed TDS statement belatedly for the 3rd and 4th Quarter for F.Y. 2012-13, which also not disputed

RAJOURI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ,RAJOURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS), JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant filed rectification application u/s 154 requesting to delete late filing fee levied u/s 234E. The AO rejected this request of the appellant by passing order dated.18.03.2020. It is observed that the appellant filed TDS statement belatedly for the 3rd and 4th Quarter for F.Y. 2012-13, which also not disputed

DHILLON AND SIMRAN LIVER FIBRO SCAN CENTRE,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( TDS)-1, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

234E charged at Rs.44840/= as against Rs.8968/= payable being the maximum TDS deductible u/s 194C. Detailed facts of the case along with written submissions were filed before CIT (Appeals) NFAC Delhi dt. 20/01/2023 and for sake of brevity, the same are not being repeated. (Refer Page S.No.3 to 5) 1. The Ld.CIT (Appeals) NFAC, Delhi dismissed assessee's appeal