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

c ) and (d) were inserted bringing clarification that during processing of a TDS statement, the fee, if any, shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of section 234E of the Act. There were contrary views on the disputed issue by the various High Courts. The ld. CIT(A), NFAC observed that the fee u/s 234E

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

c ) and (d) were inserted bringing clarification that during processing of a TDS statement, the fee, if any, shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of section 234E of the Act. There were contrary views on the disputed issue by the various High Courts. The ld. CIT(A), NFAC observed that the fee u/s 234E

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

c ) and (d) were inserted bringing clarification that during processing of a TDS statement, the fee, if any, shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of section 234E of the Act. There were contrary views on the disputed issue by the various High Courts. The ld. CIT(A), NFAC observed that the fee u/s 234E

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

Charitable Trust. The relevant observations of Hon’ble Karnataka, for ease of reference, could be extracted in the following manner: - 6. We have heard learned Senior Counsel Mr.Kumar and Mr.A.Shankar, appearing for the appellants and Mr.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel appearing for Income Tax Department. 7. We may at the outset record that, learned counsel appearing for both sides have made submissions

TATA EDUCATION TRUST ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

charitable trust), but is not registered u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and hence the persons/individuals for whom the trust is created do not have any \"vested share\" in the income of the trust, therefore, the question of the share being indeterminate or unknown does not arise. The question is a logical one but this becomes a Trust

MOHD. NAYEEM SIDDIQUI AKASH TIMBER TRADERS,THANE vs. DCIT (CPC), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

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

c) is only with effect from 01/06/2015, no fees would be payable by the assessee for any period prior to 01/06/2015 as held by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in Fatehraj Singhvi V/s Union of India (73 Taxmann.com 252 26/08/2016) which has subsequently been followed by same court while adjudicating Writ Petition No. 618/2015 filed by Shree Ayappa Educational Charitable

ROSE ROCK REAL ESTATE INDIA PVT.,MUMBAI vs. ITO (TDS) 2(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, these appeals are allowed

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 23 4E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period of the respective assessment year

SILA SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (TDS)-CPC , GHAZIABAD & DCIT ,TDS CIRCLE - 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon. & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon.

c) to (f) of sub-section (1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the demand under Section 200Afor computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234£ could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period

SILA SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (TDS)-CPC , GHAZIABAD & DCIT ,TDS CIRCLE - 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon. & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon.

c) to (f) of sub-section (1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the demand under Section 200Afor computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234£ could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period

SILA SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (TDS)-CPC , GHAZIABAD & DCIT ,TDS CIRCLE - 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon. & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon.

c) to (f) of sub-section (1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the demand under Section 200Afor computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234£ could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period

SILA SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT (TDS)-CPC , GHAZIABAD & DCIT ,TDS CIRCLE - 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon. & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon.

c) to (f) of sub-section (1) of Section 200A can be read as having prospective effect and not having retroactive character or effect. Resultantly, the demand under Section 200Afor computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234£ could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period

RECON DIES & TOOLS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC-TDS, GHZIABAD

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunatha

Charitable Trust vs DCIT(supra). The Ld.CIT(A) after considering relevant facts of the case and also, taken note of amended provisions of section 200A and by following the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High court, in the case of Rajesh Kourani vs Union Of India (2017) reported 83 taxmann.com 137 held that the arguments of the assessee that late