SANT SOLDIER ENGINEERS AND CONTRCTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .CPC-TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

condonation of delay in filing ought to have considered that on merits order passed by CPC (TDS) are illegal having being passed beyond the time limit stipulated in proviso to section 200A(1) and assessee would not have benefited from delaying the process of filing the appeal. 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case

SANT SOLIDER ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC-TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

condonation of delay in filing ought to have considered that on merits order passed by CPC (TDS) are illegal having being passed beyond the time limit stipulated in proviso to section 200A(1) and assessee would not have benefited from delaying the process of filing the appeal. 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case

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

Appeals are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

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

c) to section 200A vide Finance act 2015 w.e.f. 01-06- 2015. However, AO is empowered to levy fees u/s 234E if intimation u/s 200A is issued after 01.06.2015 by virtue of the finance Act, 2015. 5.3 The Hon'ble ITAT Amritsar bench in the judgment in the Sibia Healthcare Private Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax has held

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

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

condone 4 I.T.A. Nos. 107 to 109/Asr/2023 Gulmarg Development Authority v. ITO(TDS) the delay in filing the appeal and admit the captioned five appeals for hearing on merits. 3. At the outset, on identical facts in ITA No. 107, 108 and 109/Asr/2023, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant assessee is a development authority established under

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

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

condone 4 I.T.A. Nos. 107 to 109/Asr/2023 Gulmarg Development Authority v. ITO(TDS) the delay in filing the appeal and admit the captioned five appeals for hearing on merits. 3. At the outset, on identical facts in ITA No. 107, 108 and 109/Asr/2023, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant assessee is a development authority established under

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

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

condone 4 I.T.A. Nos. 107 to 109/Asr/2023 Gulmarg Development Authority v. ITO(TDS) the delay in filing the appeal and admit the captioned five appeals for hearing on merits. 3. At the outset, on identical facts in ITA No. 107, 108 and 109/Asr/2023, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant assessee is a development authority established under

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

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

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

delay for 30 days is condoned. 4. When the appeal was called for hearing, none was present. On perusal of record, we find that the assessee filed an adjournment petition and assessee was I.T.A. No. 189/Asr/2022 3 Assessment Year: 2015-16 unable to represent the matter because assessee’s counsel for out of state. The issue is well settled