ANJANI PRS BLENDS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

TDS statements beyond the due date, such a levy of late fee and the interest is consequential and mandatory. 5. Its canvassed before us by the learned AR that where the legislature has inserted clause (c) to section 200A(1

ANJANI PRS BLENDS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

TDS statements beyond the due date, such a levy of late fee and the interest is consequential and mandatory. 5. Its canvassed before us by the learned AR that where the legislature has inserted clause (c) to section 200A(1

V-SECURE FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-17(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14 V- Secure Financial Services Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Ward – 17(4), Hyderabad.

section 246(1)(a) and observed that relevant portion of this clause was substituted by some other clauses by the Finance Act, 2015 with effect from 01/06/2015. It did not have any bearing on the appealability of the order u/s 200A(1)(c) wherein levy of late fee u/s 234E was made. By rejecting the argument of the assessee

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), HYDERABAD

TDS), CPC, Ghaziabad, considering the TDS/TCS statements passed orders under section(s) 200A/206CB r.w.s 154 r.w.s 200A for the respective quarters, wherein demands under section 201(1A), 234E and 220(2) were raised, as under: Form No. Quarter Date of Date of filing of filing of quarterly rectification return Order u/s. by CPC Date of 234E

VIVIMED LABS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(4), HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee company, being devoid and bereft of any substance, is dismissed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1236 & 1237/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2021-22 & 2022-23) Vivimed Labs Limited, Vs. Dcit, Hyderabad. Central Circle-3(4), Pan: Aaacv6060A Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 05/01/2026 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 21/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order

TDS), CPC, Ghaziabad under section(s) 200A/206CB r.w.s 154 r.w.s 200A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) for the respective quarters pertaining to AY 2021-22 and AY Vivimed Labs Limited vs. DCIT 2022-23. As common issues are involved in the present appeals, the same are being taken up and disposed

LADE MADWESH,KADAPA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-(2), KADAPA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.546/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Lade Madwesh Vs. Income Tax Officer Kadapa Ward-2 Pan:Aabhl5201M Kadapa (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Kumar Pal Tated, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Rahul Singhania, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 22/05/2024

200A; (d) amend any intimation under sub-section (1) of section 206CB.” 10. From perusal of above it is absolutely clear that any mistake which is apparent from record can only be rectified u/s 154 of the Act. Further Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of T. S. Balaram, Income Tax vs M/S. Volkart Brothers, Bombay on 5 August

SOWBHAGYA BIOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (TDS)-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the demand under Section 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period of the respective assessment year prior

SOWBHAGYA BIOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (TDS)-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the demand under Section 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period of the respective assessment year prior

SOWBHAGYA BIOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (TDS)-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the demand under Section 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period of the respective assessment year prior

SOWBHAGYA BIOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (TDS)-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the demand under Section 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period of the respective assessment year prior

SOWBHAGYA BIOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (TDS)-2(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the demand under Section 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period of the respective assessment year prior

SOWBHAGYA BIOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD(TDS)-2(2),, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the demand under Section 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period of the respective assessment year prior

NIRMALA INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD TDS-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS statements for the period prior to 01.06.2015 i.e. the date from which the clause (c) of sub section (1) of section 200A

NIRMALA INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD TDS-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS statements for the period prior to 01.06.2015 i.e. the date from which the clause (c) of sub section (1) of section 200A

NIRMALA INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD TDS-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS statements for the period prior to 01.06.2015 i.e. the date from which the clause (c) of sub section (1) of section 200A

NIRMALA INFRA PROJECTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS statements for the period prior to 01.06.2015 i.e. the date from which the clause (c) of sub section (1) of section 200A

Y H REDDY CONSTRUCTIONS,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, WARD-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

section 200A w.e.f. 01.06.2015, giving power to make adjustment on account of fees u/s 234E while processing returns u/s 200A to be retrospective in nature, stating that this power given to the 4 ITA Nos. 1821/Hyd/2018 and others. YH Reddy Constructions and others AO is a machinery provision while the substantive provision of the power to levy fees u/s 234E

Y H REDDY CONSTRUCTIONS,SECUNDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, WARD-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

section 200A w.e.f. 01.06.2015, giving power to make adjustment on account of fees u/s 234E while processing returns u/s 200A to be retrospective in nature, stating that this power given to the 4 ITA Nos. 1821/Hyd/2018 and others. YH Reddy Constructions and others AO is a machinery provision while the substantive provision of the power to levy fees u/s 234E