THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

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. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

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. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

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. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel

THE HEAD MISTRESS,A.V.HIGH SCHOOL, PONNANNI,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ACIT, CALICUT

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

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. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel

M/S ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS AND TRADERS (PVT) LTD,MARADU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

2) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be (3) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall be paid before delivering or causing to be delivered a statement in accordance with sub-section (3) of section

M/S ST. ALPHONSA TIMBERS & TRADERS (PVT) LTD,MARADU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOCHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI SANJAY ARORA (Accountant Member), SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member)

2) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be (3) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall be paid before delivering or causing to be delivered a statement in accordance with sub-section (3) of section

M/S.TRAVEL TRAILS INDIA P. LTD,TRIVANDRUM vs. ACIT,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George K

200A could be termed as conferring substantive power upon authority and was held to be having prospective effect, hence no computation of fee for demand or intimation for fee under Section 234E could have been made for TDS deducted for respective assessment years prior to 01.06.2015. 2

ANUMOD VISHWAMBHARAN,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO TDS WARD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 78/Coch/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 79/Coch/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Anumod Viswambharan बनाम/ Ito Tc 8/2164, Cheruvikal, Tds Ward, Aayakar Vs. Medical College, Bhavan, Peroorkada Thiruvananthapuram- Road, Kowdiar, 695011. Thiruvananthapuram. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adjpv0729M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/06/2023

2) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be (3) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall be paid before delivering or causing to be delivered a statement in accordance with sub-section (3) of section

ANUMOD VISHWAMBHARAN,TRIVANDRUM vs. ITO TDS WARD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 78/Coch/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 79/Coch/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Anumod Viswambharan बनाम/ Ito Tc 8/2164, Cheruvikal, Tds Ward, Aayakar Vs. Medical College, Bhavan, Peroorkada Thiruvananthapuram- Road, Kowdiar, 695011. Thiruvananthapuram. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adjpv0729M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/06/2023

2) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be (3) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall be paid before delivering or causing to be delivered a statement in accordance with sub-section (3) of section

THE HEAD MISTRESS, AKILIYATH LP SCHOOL,KANNUR vs. THE ACIT, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

2 The Headmistress AV High School. Income Tax Act read with Section 200A of the Income Tax Act, for the 4th quarter of the financial year 2012-13. 3. The intimation passed u/s 200A of the Income Tax Act 1961, by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralised Processing Cell - TDS

DISTRICT PROJECT OFFICE KOZHIKODE,KOZHIKODE vs. ACIT, CPC TDS, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

TDS statements/returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 1-6-2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E. Hence, the intimation issued by the Ld.AO under section 200A in the present appeals does not stand and test of law. Therefore he submitted that the issue raised by way of charging the fees under

MATHIIT LEARNING PRIVATE LIMITED,SASTHAMANGALAM vs. ITO, TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS in ITA No.16, 17 & 18/ASR/2019 v) ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of Elite Engineering (Hyd) Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO Ward- 1-(2) Hyderabad in ITA No.2155 to 2159/H17 - AY 13-14, ITA No.2160 to 2163/H/7 - AY 14-15 and ITA No.2164 to 2167/H/7 - AY 15-16 decided on 29.11.2018 4.1 The Hon Kerala High Court decision cited

MATHIIT LEARNING PRIVATE LIMITED,SASTHAMANGALAM vs. ITO, TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS in ITA No.16, 17 & 18/ASR/2019 v) ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of Elite Engineering (Hyd) Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO Ward- 1-(2) Hyderabad in ITA No.2155 to 2159/H17 - AY 13-14, ITA No.2160 to 2163/H/7 - AY 14-15 and ITA No.2164 to 2167/H/7 - AY 15-16 decided on 29.11.2018 4.1 The Hon Kerala High Court decision cited

MATHIIT LEARNING PRIVATE LIMITED,SASTHAMANGALAM vs. ITO, TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the ITA Nos

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

TDS in ITA No.16, 17 & 18/ASR/2019 v) ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of Elite Engineering (Hyd) Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO Ward- 1-(2) Hyderabad in ITA No.2155 to 2159/H17 - AY 13-14, ITA No.2160 to 2163/H/7 - AY 14-15 and ITA No.2164 to 2167/H/7 - AY 15-16 decided on 29.11.2018 4.1 The Hon Kerala High Court decision cited

M/S. POYANIL HOSPITAL,KOZHENCHERRY vs. THE ITO, TDS, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year :2013-14 M/S.Poyanil Hospital, Ito, Vs. Poyanil, Tds, Kozhencherry. Alappuzha. Pan :Aacfm 7322 F Assessee Respondent

200A of the I.T. Act, wherein he levied late fees u/s 234E of the I.T. Act for various quarters. The assessee is a partnership firm. The assessee in the 3rd 3. quarter for the Financial Year 2012-13 filed the e-TDS returns on Page 2 of 6 25.04.2013. The PCIT, CPC(TDS) passed intimation under section

KERALA GRAMIN BANK, IRUMBUZHI BRANCH,MALAPPURAM vs. THE ITO WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

TDS returns themselves being furnished much thereafter. 2. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court has per the decision in Sarala Memorial Hospital v. UoI (in WP No.37775/2018, dated 18/12/2018/copy on record), referred to in the assessee’s written submissions, clarified in no uncertain terms that the said amendment to section 200A

KERALA GRAMIN BANK, UNNIKULAM BRANCH,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

TDS returns themselves being furnished much thereafter. 2. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court has per the decision in Sarala Memorial Hospital v. UoI (in WP No.37775/2018, dated 18/12/2018/copy on record), referred to in the assessee’s written submissions, clarified in no uncertain terms that the said amendment to section 200A

KERALA GRAMIN BANK, ONCHIYAM BRANCH,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

TDS returns themselves being furnished much thereafter. 2. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court has per the decision in Sarala Memorial Hospital v. UoI (in WP No.37775/2018, dated 18/12/2018/copy on record), referred to in the assessee’s written submissions, clarified in no uncertain terms that the said amendment to section 200A