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

TDS statements within the prescribed time in sub section (3) of section 200 of the Act. So, section 234E is not punitive

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 on 21/11/2020 as against the due date of 31/07/19, the same was processed and the AO passed the order under section 200A on 26/11/2020 wherein the AO levied late fee under section 234E

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 was filed late is not disputed. Section 234E which charges fees for late filing of return reads as under: 234E. Fee for default in furnishing statements.— (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of the Act, where a person fails to deliver or cause to be delivered a statement within the time prescribed in sub-section (3

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 was filed late is not disputed. Section 234E which charges fees for late filing of return reads as under: 234E. Fee for default in furnishing statements.— (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of the Act, where a person fails to deliver or cause to be delivered a statement within the time prescribed in sub-section (3

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)

TDS returns. That the late fees detail for Form No. 26Q is as under: Amount Section FY Quarter Due Date Date of filing i) Rs. 90400/- 234E 2013-14/Q2 15.10.2013 03.01.2015 ii) Rs. 37,886/- 234E 2013-14/Q4 31.05.2014 02.01.2015 3

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)

TDS returns. That the late fees detail for Form No. 26Q is as under: Amount Section FY Quarter Due Date Date of filing i) Rs. 90400/- 234E 2013-14/Q2 15.10.2013 03.01.2015 ii) Rs. 37,886/- 234E 2013-14/Q4 31.05.2014 02.01.2015 3

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) that too by expressly put bar for penalty under Section 272A by insertion of proviso to Section 272A(2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A payable under Section 234E

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 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

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

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 200A of the Act, which existed

STYLAM INDUSTRIES LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, TDS, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 194-IA, assessee was supposed to deduct TDS on payments exceeding Rs.50 lacs for purchase of land or building except agriculture land. This TDS was to be deducted @ 1%, thus, according to the AO, assessee failed to deduct the TDS. Therefore, he worked out a default of Rs.1,25,546/- u/s 201(1) and charged interest

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 200A of the Act, which existed