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)

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. That the assessee filed the first appeal before the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi which was dismissed on 03.12.2021. 4. That aggrieved with the decision of CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi the assessee

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

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

Bench: Ms Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

2. Briefly stated 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. The assessee filed appeal against the aforesaid intimations, challenging