SPECIAL JUDGE COURT SC/ST,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AJMER

In the result, the ground of appeal is partly allowed

234E can be made under clause (c) of Sub-section 1 of Section 200A. As the TDS return of the appellant has been processed on 04.10.2017, therefore I am of the considered view that adjustment made under section 200(A)(1)(c) in respect of the ITA 1086/JP/2019 3

RASHTRIYA MILITARY SCHOOL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AJMER

In the result, the ground of appeal is partly allowed

234E was not conferred until amendment was brought by Finance Act, 2015 in Section 200A of the Act (made effective from 1.6.2015). This clearly means that there was no mechanism of charging of fees prior to 3 ITA No. 988-995/JP/2019 Rashtriya Military School, Ajmer vs. ITO (TDS

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-3, JAIPUR vs. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., ASSISTANT ENGINEER (O&M), SIKAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed on account of low tax

TDS statement(s) within the time prescribed in the provisions of Section 200(3)/206C(3) of the Act, shall be liable to pay, by way of fee, a sum of Rs. 200/- for everyday during which the failure continues. It is also evident that aggrieved by the provision of Section 234E

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-3, JAIPUR vs. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., ASSISTANT ENGINEER (O &M) PUSHKAR, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed on account of low tax

TDS statement(s) within the time prescribed in the provisions of Section 200(3)/206C(3) of the Act, shall be liable to pay, by way of fee, a sum of Rs. 200/- for everyday during which the failure continues. It is also evident that aggrieved by the provision of Section 234E

AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, BHUPALSAGAR,BHUPALSAGAR vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, BHUPALSAGAR, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

3. Any other matter with prior permission of the chair.” 5. Succinctly, the facts as culled out from the records are that in this case and intimation u/s 200A/206CB of the Act was passed on 12.03.2014 therein raising at demand of Rs. 58,100/- as per provisions of section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon

AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, BHUPALSAGAR,BHUPALSAGAR, CHITTORGARH vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

3. Any other matter with prior permission of the chair.” 5. Succinctly, the facts as culled out from the records are that in this case and intimation u/s 200A/206CB of the Act was passed on 12.03.2014 therein raising at demand of Rs. 58,100/- as per provisions of section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon

AJMER VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED, BHUPALSAGAR,BHUPALSAGAR vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, BHUPALSAGAR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

3. Any other matter with prior permission of the chair.” 5. Succinctly, the facts as culled out from the records are that in this case and intimation u/s 200A/206CB of the Act was passed on 12.03.2014 therein raising at demand of Rs. 58,100/- as per provisions of section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon

AJMER VIDHUT NITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, RAWATBHATA,RAWATBHATA, CHITTORGARH vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, RAWATBHATA, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

3. Any other matter with prior permission of the chair.” 5. Succinctly, the facts as culled out from the records are that in this case and intimation u/s 200A/206CB of the Act was passed on 12.03.2014 therein raising at demand of Rs. 58,100/- as per provisions of section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon

AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, BHUPALSAGAR,BHUPALSAGAR vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

3. Any other matter with prior permission of the chair.” 5. Succinctly, the facts as culled out from the records are that in this case and intimation u/s 200A/206CB of the Act was passed on 12.03.2014 therein raising at demand of Rs. 58,100/- as per provisions of section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon

AJMER VIDHUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, RAWATBHATA,RAWATBHATA, CHITTORGARH vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, RAWATBHATA, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

3. Any other matter with prior permission of the chair.” 5. Succinctly, the facts as culled out from the records are that in this case and intimation u/s 200A/206CB of the Act was passed on 12.03.2014 therein raising at demand of Rs. 58,100/- as per provisions of section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon

AJMER VIDHUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, RAWATBHATA,RAWATBHATA, CHITTORGARH vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

3. Any other matter with prior permission of the chair.” 5. Succinctly, the facts as culled out from the records are that in this case and intimation u/s 200A/206CB of the Act was passed on 12.03.2014 therein raising at demand of Rs. 58,100/- as per provisions of section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon

AJMER VIDHUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, RAWATBHATA,RAWATBHATA vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, RAWATBHATA, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

3. Any other matter with prior permission of the chair.” 5. Succinctly, the facts as culled out from the records are that in this case and intimation u/s 200A/206CB of the Act was passed on 12.03.2014 therein raising at demand of Rs. 58,100/- as per provisions of section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, DANTA RAMGARH,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

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

234E of the IT Act while processing quarterly TDS statement filed by the assessee for the financial year 2012-13 and 2015-16 respectively U/s 200A(1) of the IT Act. Due to prevailing COVId-19 pandemic condition the hearing of the appeals are concluded through video conference. 2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, KANWAT ,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

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

234E of the IT Act while processing quarterly TDS statement filed by the assessee for the financial year 2012-13 and 2015-16 respectively U/s 200A(1) of the IT Act. Due to prevailing COVId-19 pandemic condition the hearing of the appeals are concluded through video conference. 2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, DANTA RAMGARH,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

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

234E of the IT Act while processing quarterly TDS statement filed by the assessee for the financial year 2012-13 and 2015-16 respectively U/s 200A(1) of the IT Act. Due to prevailing COVId-19 pandemic condition the hearing of the appeals are concluded through video conference. 2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, DANTA RAMGARH,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

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

234E of the IT Act while processing quarterly TDS statement filed by the assessee for the financial year 2012-13 and 2015-16 respectively U/s 200A(1) of the IT Act. Due to prevailing COVId-19 pandemic condition the hearing of the appeals are concluded through video conference. 2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, NEEM KA THANA,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

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

234E of the IT Act while processing quarterly TDS statement filed by the assessee for the financial year 2012-13 and 2015-16 respectively U/s 200A(1) of the IT Act. Due to prevailing COVId-19 pandemic condition the hearing of the appeals are concluded through video conference. 2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, NEEM KA THANA,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

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

234E of the IT Act while processing quarterly TDS statement filed by the assessee for the financial year 2012-13 and 2015-16 respectively U/s 200A(1) of the IT Act. Due to prevailing COVId-19 pandemic condition the hearing of the appeals are concluded through video conference. 2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing