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)

delay, the same is hereby condoned and both the appeals are admitted for adjudication. 4. In ITA No. 35/Chd/2022 for A.Y 2014-15 , the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi erred in upholding

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

Bench: Ms Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

section 234E of the Act, amounting to Rs.12,683 and Rs.10,300 respectively. 3. The assessee filed appeal against the aforesaid intimations, challenging the levy of the fees u/s 234E of the Act, before the CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) found that both the appeals were barred by limitation having been delayed for filing by 195 & 493 days respectively. Ld.CIT

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

condonation of delay and the appeal prior to amendments also did not make the imposition of late fees by Section 234E to be ultra vires.” We, therefore, find that the matter raised for consideration before the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court was the constitutional validity of section 234E and as far as the issue of powers of the Assessing officer