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

234E: Rs.2,41,340/-; (ii) interest under section 201(1A): Rs.48,529/-; and (iii) interest under section 220(2): Rs.12,032/-. Also, it was observed by him that the interest under section 201(1A) actually included, viz., (i) short payment of tax: Rs. 17,004/-; (ii) short deduction/collection of tax: Rs. 13,660/-; and (iii) interest under section

OCHRE MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD( TDS)-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

234E is not for rendering any service to the assesse and in Substance it is Penal in Nature. 7. The Ld CIT(A), NFAC, Failed to appreciate that section 200 A (1) (c) Cannot be invoked retrospectively i.e F.Y 2013-14 as Section 200 A(1)(c) was inserted w.e.f 01.06.2015. 8. The CPC while processing the TDS

OCHRE MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD (TDS)2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Ochre Media Limited Vs. Ito, Ward (Tds)-2(1) 9-1-129/1, 2Nd Floor I.T.Towers, A.C.Guards Oxford Plaza, S.D.Road Hyderabad-500 004 Secunderabad-500 003

234E is not for rendering any service to the assessee and in Substance it is Penal in Nature. 7. The Ld CIT(A), NFAC, Failed to appreciate that section 200 A (1) (C) Cannot be invoked retrospectively i.e F.Y 2012-13 as Section 200 A(1)(C) was inserted w.c.f 01.06.2015 8. The CPC while processing the TDS

KATEPALLY VENKATA SUBRAMANYAM ,KURNOOL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS),WARD-1, KURNOOL

In the result, these three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

TDS levied late filing fees under Section 234E of the Act for Q1 Rs.55,000/- Q2 Rs.36,500/- and Q3 Rs.18,100/- aggregating to Rs.1,09,600/-. The contentions of the assessee ,that the levy of late fees under Section 234E of the Act is illegal and relied on the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case

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

1) of the Act w.e.f 01/06/2015, then in respect of the TDS statements which were filed under the respective sections of the Act, for the period prior to 01/06/2015, no late filing fee could be charged u/s 234E

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

1) of the Act w.e.f 01/06/2015, then in respect of the TDS statements which were filed under the respective sections of the Act, for the period prior to 01/06/2015, no late filing fee could be charged u/s 234E

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 was inserted incorporating the section 234E

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 was inserted incorporating the section 234E

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 was inserted incorporating the section 234E

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 was inserted incorporating the section 234E

COSYN LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , TDS, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum.A.Nos.85 & 86/Hyd/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.64 & 65/Hyd/2019) Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/S. Cosyn Limited, The Deputy Commissioner (Formerly Known As Of Income Tax, Css Technergy Limited). Tds, Circle 1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan No.Aabcc3628G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri Praveen Nair For Sri Karan Talwar. Revenue By: Sri Swapnil Patil. Date Of Hearing: 04/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 16/02/2022 Order Per S. S. Godara, J.M. These Revenue’S Twin Miscellaneous Applications Filed U/S 254(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘Act’) Seek To Recall Our Impugned Common Order 11.06.2021 Deleting Section 200A R.W.S. 234E Late Filing Fee; Involving Varying Sums, Respectively. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused.

TDS, Circle 1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN No.AABCC3628G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri Praveen Nair for Sri Karan Talwar. Revenue by: Sri Swapnil Patil. Date of hearing: 04/02/2022 Date of pronouncement: 16/02/2022 ORDER Per S. S. Godara, J.M. These Revenue’s twin miscellaneous applications filed u/s 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) seek to recall

COSYN LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , TDS, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum.A.Nos.85 & 86/Hyd/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita Nos.64 & 65/Hyd/2019) Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/S. Cosyn Limited, The Deputy Commissioner (Formerly Known As Of Income Tax, Css Technergy Limited). Tds, Circle 1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan No.Aabcc3628G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri Praveen Nair For Sri Karan Talwar. Revenue By: Sri Swapnil Patil. Date Of Hearing: 04/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 16/02/2022 Order Per S. S. Godara, J.M. These Revenue’S Twin Miscellaneous Applications Filed U/S 254(2) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘Act’) Seek To Recall Our Impugned Common Order 11.06.2021 Deleting Section 200A R.W.S. 234E Late Filing Fee; Involving Varying Sums, Respectively. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused.

TDS, Circle 1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN No.AABCC3628G. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri Praveen Nair for Sri Karan Talwar. Revenue by: Sri Swapnil Patil. Date of hearing: 04/02/2022 Date of pronouncement: 16/02/2022 ORDER Per S. S. Godara, J.M. These Revenue’s twin miscellaneous applications filed u/s 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) seek to recall

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

SUSHEELA HOSPITAL,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(5), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

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 AO is a machinery provision while the substantive provision of the power to levy fees u/s 234E was always there on the Statute from