SYNDICATE BANK vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

TDS statement on time possibly because a separate Section 271H was inserted in the Act. Section 271H will be relevant

M/S CATHODIC CONTROL CO. LTD., vs. UNION OF INDIA

The appeals are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

TDS statement on time possibly because a separate Section 271H was inserted in the Act. Section 271H will be relevant

M/S NEW MEDIA COMPANY vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

SREE C B EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL TRUST vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

M/S. K K BROTHERS vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

M/S PRODIGY TECHNOVATIONS PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

M/S TEACHERS CO OPERATIVE BANK vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

DR V. NARAYANASWAMY vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

M/S. LAKSHMINIRMAN BANGALORE PVT.LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

MINTENT SERVICED APARTMENTS PVT LTD., vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

M/S PRAKASH BUS CORPORATION PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

SRI CHANDRAKAR K KAMATH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

M/S NEW MEDIA COMPANY vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

M/S TEE ENN ENTERPRISES vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

M/S HOTEL FISHLAND vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

M/S PROCESS PUMPS (I) PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

ADITHYA BIZORP SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT LTD vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H

CENTRAL POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

TDS statements, Fee is sought to be recovered under Section 234E, it is levy of penalty in disguise though the impugned Section is included under Chapter XVII of the Act. (f) Section 271H