BAKHTAWAR CONSTRUCTION CO. P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT (TDS) RG 1, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6943/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Bakhtawar Construction Co. Addl. Cit (Tds) Rg 1 P. Ltd, Meher House, 10T H Floor, K.G. Mittal 1St Floor, Casasji Patel Street Ayurvedic Hosptial Bldg, V. Fort, Bombay 400001 Charni Road(W) Mumbai 400002 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacb4942P (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

TDS returns under section 272A(2)(k) of the Act. Since section 273B of the Act covers the cases of levy

LATE JAYESH THAR ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, WARD KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

2)(k) of the Act which provided for the penalty of Rs.100/- per day for each day of default in filing TDS statements. But, when Section 234E was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 simultaneously, a second proviso was added under Section 272A

LATE SHRI JAYESH THAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, WARD KALYAN , KALYAN

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

2)(k) of the Act which provided for the penalty of Rs.100/- per day for each day of default in filing TDS statements. But, when Section 234E was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 simultaneously, a second proviso was added under Section 272A

LATE JAYESH THAR,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, WARD KALYAN, KALYAN

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

2)(k) of the Act which provided for the penalty of Rs.100/- per day for each day of default in filing TDS statements. But, when Section 234E was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 simultaneously, a second proviso was added under Section 272A

LATE SHRI JAYEESH THAR ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD KALYAN , KALYAN

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

2)(k) of the Act which provided for the penalty of Rs.100/- per day for each day of default in filing TDS statements. But, when Section 234E was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 simultaneously, a second proviso was added under Section 272A

DR KHAN INDUSTRIAL CONSULTANTS P.LTD,THANE vs. ADDL CIT TDS RG, THANE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4659/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

section 272A(2)(k) of the Act r.w.s. 273B of 1961 Act, after examination of the evidences filed by the assessee in its defense explaining reasonable cause in filing quarterly TDS

DR KHAN INDUSTRIAL CONSULTANTS P.LTD,THANE vs. ADDL CIT TDS RG, THANE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4659/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

section 272A(2)(k) of the Act r.w.s. 273B of 1961 Act, after examination of the evidences filed by the assessee in its defense explaining reasonable cause in filing quarterly TDS

DR KHAN INDUSTRIAL CONSULTANTS P.LTD,THANE vs. ADDL CIT TDS RG, THANE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4659/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

section 272A(2)(k) of the Act r.w.s. 273B of 1961 Act, after examination of the evidences filed by the assessee in its defense explaining reasonable cause in filing quarterly TDS

NATIONAL LAMINATE CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. CPC (TDS), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

2)(k) of the Act which provided for the penalty of Rs.100/- per day for each day of default in filing TDS statements. But, when Section 234E was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 simultaneously, a second proviso was added under Section 272A

LAWMEN CONCEPTS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CPC-TDS , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal stands allowed to the extent indicated in the order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

2)(k) of the Act which provided for the penalty of Rs.100/- per day for each day of default in filing TDS statements. But, when Section 234E was inserted with effect from 1.7.2012 simultaneously, a second proviso was added under Section 272A

TURBO TRAVELS INDIA P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT (TDS) RG 3, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4961/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S Turbo Travels India Pvt. The Additional बनाम/ Ltd., Commissioner Of Income V. 105, Doctor House, Tax – (Tds), Pedder Road, Range 3, Mumbai -400026. 10 Th Floor, Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg., Charni Road, Mumbai – 400002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaact 4767 G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

TDS returns on time without any delay with the prescribed income-tax authority. The ld. CIT(A) considered the submissions of the assessee and observed that in assessee’s case clause (k) of sub-section 2 of Section 272A

SHRI VINAY D. NARKAR,MUMBAI vs. ADDL. CIT TDS, THANE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri C.N Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2181/Mum/2018 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Shri. Vinay D. Narkar, बिाम/ Addl. Cit(Tds), 1/3, James House, Ground Floor, B-Wing, Dsouza Wadi, Qureshi Mansion, V. Waglre Estate, Gokhale Road, Naupada, Shivaji Nagar Road No. 3, Thane-West, Thane-400604 Thane-400602 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aespn7371K (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: None Shri. Rajiv Gubgaotra (Dr) Revenue By:

Section 272A(2)(k)/274 r.w.s. 200(3) of the 1961 Act for levying penalty u/s. 272A(A)(k) of the 1961 Act, vide notices dated 02.08.2013 issued to the assessee for delay in submitting quarterly TDS

ASPANDIAR R. IRANI & GUSTAD R. IRANI,THANE vs. CIT (A)-1, THANE

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh

TDS and therefore these sections are not applicable. The clause (k) of section 272A(2) is however found applicable in case

VARAD FASHIIONS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT (TDS) RG 3, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

section 272A(2)(k) of the Act should not be levied in its case for assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 for non filing of quarterly TDS

VARAD FASHIIONS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT (TDS) RG 3, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain

section 272A(2)(k) of the Act should not be levied in its case for assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 for non filing of quarterly TDS

MR. SABLE YASHWANT LAXMAN,MUMBAI vs. ADDL. CIT, TDS RG, THANE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mr. Sable Yashwant Laxman, Addl. Cit- Tds Range, Sable Appartments, Shantinagar, Vs. Thane. Next To Hotel Maharaja, Old Mumbai, Khopoli-410 203. Pan No. Pnes 09546 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Viraj Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Yashwant Bhaskar, Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/11/2021

272A : Penalty -Delay in filing e. -TDS return -Reasonable cause -Levy of penalty was held to be not justified. [S. 272(2) (k), 273B] Allowing the appeal of the assesse, the Tribunal held that, delay in filing quarterly return was duetonon-avilablity of expert staff, who were aware of intricacies of filing e-returns. Tribunal also heldthat provisions of section

RAVIRAJ RELAMPADDU,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT 23(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

section 272A(2)(k) of the Act. 3. Brief facts are, while processing the TDS statement filed in Form no.26Q

ADDL CIT R G 7(1), MUMBAI vs. NOVARTIS INDIA LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS HINDUSTAN CIBA GIEGY LTD. ), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS, the Dy. CIT had passed an order under section 154 of the Act (see pages 3-5 of Factual paper book-1). 4 25.08.2003 The Dy. CIT issued a notice under section 143(2) of the Act, selecting the Assessee’s ROI for scrutiny (see page 6 of Factual paper book-1). 5 17.10.2003 The Addl. CIT (Transfer Pricing

M/S.BLUE STAR CONSTRUCTION CO.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL. CIT , THANE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Blem/S Blue Star Construction Co. V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Near Shankar Mandir Tax Tds Raigad, Thane Opp. Shirke Plant Sh-54 Uran Panvel Road Tal., Uran Raigad – 400 702, Thane Pan: Aaffb3087E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.Y. Pandit Department By : Ms. Kavita P.Kaushik

k) i.e. in respect of furnishing of copy of statements within the time specified in sub-section (3) of section 200 of the Act for non-deduction of TDS. However, in this case order imposing penalty u/s. 272A(2