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

271H (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

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

271H (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

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

271H (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

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

271H (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

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