CURRENT INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,BASANT VIHAR vs. ACIT, DCIT, CIRCLE-7, JAIPUR , BABA SIDHNATH BAHWAN

c)amend any intimation under sub-section (1) of Section 200A;]\n(d)[ amend any intimation under sub-section (1) of section\n206CB.] [Inserted by Finance Act, 2015 (No. 20 of 2015), dated\n14.5.2015.]\n[(1-A) Where any matter has been considered and decided in any\nproceeding by way of appeal or revision relating to an order referred

DCIT, CR-7, JAIPUR vs. SHRI ANIL GUPTA, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Hearing” Dcit Vs. Shri Anil Gupta

TDS commission for (refer Cases). Pages 9 to 13 of paper book of AR. there is an Audit objection Thirdly, The Ld DR submitted that according to the CBDT Circular, No 05/2012 dated 01.08.2012,the assesee has to be disallowance u/s 37 and the AO accordingly made disallowance Rs.5,37,270/-. Further, the Ld DR submitted that

GOVERNMENT SECONDARY SCHOOL KUMHARIA,AJMER vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME (CPC) (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

200A. As per TDS return of the appellant has been processed on 29.07.2016, therefore, I am of the considered view that adjustment made under section 200(A)(1)(c

AEN (VIG)-I AVVNL JHUNJHUNU, SIKAR,JHUNJHUNU vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

TDS return at source within time. That when the TAX had been deposited in time, there could not have any object or intention as the part of assesse not to submit the return in time. 7. The ld CIT (APPEALS) erred in not following the provision of Section 200A in sub section (1) as clause 'c

AO (SC), AVVNL, SIKAR,SIKAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

200A OF IT ACT 1961 Levying late filing Fee of Rs 5600/- U/s 234 by ACIT, CPC(TDS) GHAJIYABAD, (TDS return Relates to 24Q 2nd Qtr. Financial year 2012-13. 5. As per provision of Sec. 234 E late fee cannot be recovered for TDS statements which were due for F.Y 2012-13 as well on TDS statements late

XEN (O&M=M) AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD.,AJMER vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

c) subsection 1 of 200A. 1. The assesse has filed an appeal with Ld CIT(appeals) JAIPUR which was technically delayed. The delay in filing the appeal was due to the fact that applicant has not receivd the notice by post as well as by email. After ITO demand notice the applicant checked income tax site and then filed