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

d) and (f) have come into force only with effect from 1.6.2015 and hence, there was no authority or competence or jurisdiction on the part of the concerned Officer or the Department to compute and determine the fee under Section 234E in respect of the assessment year of the earlier period and the return filed for the said respective assessment

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

d) and (f) have come into force only with effect from 1.6.2015 and hence, there was no authority or competence or jurisdiction on the part of the concerned Officer or the Department to compute and determine the fee under Section 234E in respect of the assessment year of the earlier period and the return filed for the said respective assessment

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

d) and (f) have come into force only with effect from 1.6.2015 and hence, there was no authority or competence or jurisdiction on the part of the concerned Officer or the Department to compute and determine the fee under Section 234E in respect of the assessment year of the earlier period and the return filed for the said respective assessment

THE COMMANDER WORKS ENGINEERS,PATIALA vs. JCIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptathe Commander Works Engineers, Vs. The Jcit (Tds), Headquarter Bldg No.26, Chandigarh. New Lal Bagh, Patiala. Pan: Ptlh12424G (Appellant) (Respondent)

272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’), for late filing of TDS returns. 2. Briefly stated, while perusing the TDS returns filed by the assessee, the jurisdictional Assessing Officer,TDS-1, Patiaia observed that the quarterly statement in form number. 24Q for the 1 s t, 2 nd, 3r d

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. WARYAM STEEL CASTING PRIVATE LIMITED, KANGANWAL ROAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

272A(1)(d) were initiated for under-reporting income, failure to file an audit report, and non-compliance with statutory notices, respectively. Interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C was also charged. 4. Against the order of the Ld. AO the assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order held

WARYAM STEEL CASTINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the Cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

272A(1)(d) were initiated for under-reporting income, failure to file an audit report, and non-compliance with statutory notices, respectively. Interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C was also charged. 4. Against the order of the Ld. AO the assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order held

GEETA SHARMA,SUNAM vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , PATIALA

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

272A (1)(d) of the Income-tax Act,1961 shall be initiated for noncompliance with statutory notices. Therefore, having regard to the facts of the case, a show cause notice vide DIN & Notice No ITBA/AST/F/143(3)(SCN)/20 21-22/1035081559(1) Dated 25/08/2021 was issued to the assessee in e-portal of faceless assessment giving opportunity to explain

RAJESH BANSAL,CHANDIGARH vs. ADDL. CIT (TDS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1447/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

D' BENCH (2010) 131 TTJ (Mumbai)(UO) 59 : (2010) 37 SOT 139 "Penalty under s. 272A(2)(k)—Delay in filing TDS return— Reasonable cause—Assessee has been regular in deducting tax and also paying the same—Delay in filing the returns, even if they are characterized as negligence on the part of the assessee, can only be considered