SH. JASBIR SINGH ANAND,JADADHRI vs. ACIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result all the above appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Garg

3) of section 200 of the Act. So, section 234E is not punitive in nature but a fixed charge by way of fee is levied for late filing of TDS statements. Therefore, on combined reading of section 200A

SH. SAURABH KAUSHIK,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Disposal Of The Same.

TDS statement in Form 27Q as required under section 200(3) was filed by the assessee on 21/11/2020 as against the due date of 31/07/19 resulting in levy of late filing fee by the AO under section 234E amounting to Rs. 95,800/- in terms of order passed by the AO under section 200A

PRINCIPAL RAJIV GANDHI GOVT. AYURVEDIC COLLEGE ,PAPROLA vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD (ITO, TDS), PALAMPUR

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

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

TDS return as per the provisions of section 200(3) of the Act,meaning thereby that it is mandatory.This is also evident from the language of section 200A

PRINCIPAL RAJIV GANDHI GOVT. AYURVEDIC COLLEGE ,PAPROLA vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD (ITO, TDS), PALAMPUR

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

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

TDS return as per the provisions of section 200(3) of the Act,meaning thereby that it is mandatory.This is also evident from the language of section 200A

HP AGRO INDUSTRIES CORP. LTD.,PARWANOO vs. ACIT, CPC (TDS), VAISHALI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1072/Chd/2018 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/S H.P. Agro Industries The Asstt. Cit, बनाम Corporation Ltd., Centralized Processing Cell-Tds, Plot No. 8, Bangluru Pesticide Unit, Parwanoo (H.P) "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Ptlh11428E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Hearing Through Video Conferencing "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, Addl. Cit(Dr)

3. The assessee has challenged the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) on the following grounds: - 1. That authorities below ought to have considered that due date for filing TDS return was 15.07.2014 for the period between 01.04.2014 to 30.06.2014 and amendment of section 200A

BATRA EXPORTS,FAZILKA vs. DCIT, |TDS,, LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

200A of the Act for computation and intimation for payment of fee cannot be issued as the TDS returns relate to quarter ending before 01.06.2015. So, the fee imposed is liable to be quashed. 3. That not only TDS was paid before 01.06.2015 but also TDS Return was filed before 01.06.2015. So, the fee u/s 234E cannot be charged while

BATRA EXPORTS,FAZILKA vs. DCIT, |TDS,, LUDHIANA

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

200A of the Act for computation and intimation for payment of fee cannot be issued as the TDS returns relate to quarter ending before 01.06.2015. So, the fee imposed is liable to be quashed. 3. That not only TDS was paid before 01.06.2015 but also TDS Return was filed before 01.06.2015. So, the fee u/s 234E cannot be charged while

M/S CHILL POINT ENGINEERS PVT LTD,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Chill Point Engineers P.Ltd., Vs. The Dcit, H.No. 2217, Hem Kutir, Cpc(Tds), Vaishali, Mani Majra, Ghaziabad Chandigarh. Current Jurisdiction: Pan No. Aabcc5144R Ito(Tds-1)Chandigarh. & Assessment Year: 2013-14

3. That on the facts, circumstances of the case and in law, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO wherein he had erred in creating a demand of Rs 12,200/- u/s 234E on account of late filing of TDS statement by passing intimation u/s 200A even when the said demand raised through intimation

M/S SONALAC PAINTS AND COATINGS LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), VAISHALI JURISDICTION AT ITO, TDS-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both appeals of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Smt. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Sonalac Paints & Coatings Ltd., Vs. The Dcit, Sco Plot No. 768, Indl. Area, Cpc(Tds),Vaishali , Phase-Ii, Chandigarh. Ghaziabad Pan No. Aaics4995D Current Jurisdiction: Ito(Tds-1)Chandigarh. & Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Nagpal Trading Co., Vs. The Dcit, Sco No. 1037, Sector 22-B, Cpc(Tds),Vaishali , Chandigarh. Ghaziabad Pan No. Aaefn0052F Current Jurisdiction: Ito(Tds-1)Chandigarh

3. That on the facts, circumstances of the case and in law, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO wherein he had erred in creating a demand of Rs 14,000/- u/s 234E on account of late filing of TDS statement by passing intimation u/s 200A even when the said demand raised through intimation

ST. BEDES EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,,SHIMLA vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), VAISHALI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year : 2013-14

3. During the course of hearing before us, ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the fees in the present case was levied while ITA No.1707/Chd/2017- St. Bedes Educational Society, Shimla 2 processing the TDS return u/s 200A of the Act, prior to 01.06.2015, and that as per the provisions of Section

M/S LOTUS MACHINES PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS-1), VAISHALI CURRENT JURISDCITION ITO (TDS-1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year : 2013-14

3. During the course of hearing before us, ld. counsel for the ITA No.1137/Chd/2017- M/s Lotus Machines Pvt Ltd., Chandigarh 2 assessee stated that the fees in the present case was levied while processing the TDS return u/s 200A of the Act, prior to 01.06.2015, and that as per the provisions of Section

NAVPREET SINGH BHASIN,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, TDS-2, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

TDS returns for the financial years 2012-13, 13-14 & 14-15. It was submitted that there was no provision for levying fee under section 200A for the period prior to 01.06.2015 and the same was subsequently inserted in section 200A(1)(c) with prospective effect from 01.06.2015. Therefore, the fee levied under section 234E needs to be deleted

M/S STEEL STRIPS WHEELS LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptam/S Steel Strips Wheels Limited, Vs. The D.C.I.T.(Tds), Sco 49-50, Sector 26, Sector 17E, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. Pan: Aaccs3003L (Appellant) (Respondent)

3. The brief facts relevant to the issue are that assessee had filed its TDS return which was processed by the Assessing Officer u/s 200A of the Act, wherein he observed that the assessee had deducted TDS u/s 192 of the Act of Rs.51,38,361/- which had been deposited late. The Assessing Officer therefore levied interest of Rs.2

M/S N.N. FOREX TRAVEL SERVICES PVT. LTD.,MOHALI vs. DCIT (CPC), TDS, , GHAZIABAD

Bench: Ms Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

TDS returns filed by the assessee were processed and intimation sent to the assessee u/s section 200A of the Act, dated 13/01/2015 and 21/03/2014,levying fees for late filing of the returns, as per section 234E of the Act, amounting to Rs.12,683 and Rs.10,300 respectively. 3