DR AMBEDKAR INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL WORK,NAGPUR MAHARASHTRA vs. ITO WARD-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

TDS statement which\nwas processed on 10/04/2022, wherein demand was raised for late fees\nunder section 234E for ₹ 16,400, and interest thereon under section 220(2) of\n19,593.\n4. The learned CIT(A) confirmed the assessment order so passed by the\nAssessing Officer.\n5.\nWe have given a thoughtful consideration to the arguments made by\nthe rival parties

BANK OF INDIA ,PRASHEONI BRANCH vs. ACIT,CPC,TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

section 200A, which is effective from 01.06.2015. In this regard, our reference was drawn to the following table containing the requisite particulars in respect of the TDS statements filed by the respective branches of the assessee wherein the late fee u/s 234E has been levied while processing the TDS statements by the ACIT TDS-CPC and which has been confirmed

BANK OF INDIA,SIHORA BRANCH vs. ACIT,CPC(TDS), GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

section 200A, which is effective from 01.06.2015. In this regard, our reference was drawn to the following table containing the requisite particulars in respect of the TDS statements filed by the respective branches of the assessee wherein the late fee u/s 234E has been levied while processing the TDS statements by the ACIT TDS-CPC and which has been confirmed

SANJAY GANDHI SMRUTI VIDYA MANDIR ,HINGANGHAT, WARDHA vs. ITO TDS WD 52(1), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

14. 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, learned Commissioner of Income Tax - (Appeals) was justified in affirming the late filing levy of tax on the appellant by the DCIT, CPC-TDS. 2. The appellant craves leave to add or alter any other ground that

SUNILKUMAR RAJENDRA RAI,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. 4. In the present case, the Assessing Officer has levied the late fee under section 234E for delay in filing of Form no.26Q amounting to ` 22,420, for the financial year 2012–13 2013–14

ASHWIN SURESH CHANDAK,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD, TDS 51(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

TDS return was processed by the Central Processing Centre, late filing fee under section 234E of the Act at ` 11,840, which include late payment and interest under section 220(2) of the Act vide intimation under section 200A of the Act. 5. On appeal, the learned CIT(A), while discussing the issue in detail, vide Para–4.3/Page

DAMMANI INDUSTRIES,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD, TDS 51(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

TDS return was processed by the Central Processing Centre, late filing fee under section 234E of the Act at ` 11,840, which include late payment and interest under section 220(2) of the Act vide intimation under section 200A of the Act. 5. On appeal, the learned CIT(A), while discussing the issue in detail, vide Para–4.3/Page

BANK OF INDIA,UMRED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CPC.TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. 4. In the present case, the Assessing Officer has levied the late fee under section 234E for delay in filing of Form no.26Q amounting to ` 22,420, for the financial year 2012–13 2013–14

BANK OF INDIA, ARMORI ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. 4. In the present case, the Assessing Officer has levied the late fee under section 234E for delay in filing of Form no.26Q amounting to ` 22,420, for the financial year 2012–13 2013–14

BANK OF INDIA, PANCHGAON,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

TDS return under section 200A of the Act. 4. In the present case, the Assessing Officer has levied the late fee under section 234E for delay in filing of Form no.26Q amounting to ` 22,420, for the financial year 2012–13 2013–14

HASANTE BURHANIAH FIDAYYIAH TRUST,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeals for A

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

TDS) while processing them under section 200A of the Act charged late filing fee under section 234E of the Act for different quarters aggregating to ` 1,34,576 for the assessment year 2013–14

SACHIN RAMESH HOLEY,WARDHA vs. ITO WARD 1, WARDHA, WARDHA

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

14, 2014–15 respectively. The amendment to the provisions of section 200A of the Act came into effect from 1st June 2015. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai, in S.S.S. Construction v/s ACIT, ITA no.3495 to 3504/Ch./2019, vide order dated 22/04/2022, has considered this issue by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High

SACHIN RAMESH HOLEY,WARDHA vs. ITO WARD 1, WARDHA, WARDHA

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

14, 2014–15 respectively. The amendment to the provisions of section 200A of the Act came into effect from 1st June 2015. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai, in S.S.S. Construction v/s ACIT, ITA no.3495 to 3504/Ch./2019, vide order dated 22/04/2022, has considered this issue by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High

SACHIN RAMESH HOLEY,WARDHA vs. ITO WARD 1, WARDHA, WARDHA

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

14, 2014–15 respectively. The amendment to the provisions of section 200A of the Act came into effect from 1st June 2015. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai, in S.S.S. Construction v/s ACIT, ITA no.3495 to 3504/Ch./2019, vide order dated 22/04/2022, has considered this issue by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High

SACHIN RAMESH HOLEY,WARDHA vs. ITO WARD 1, WARDHA, WARDHA

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

14, 2014–15 respectively. The amendment to the provisions of section 200A of the Act came into effect from 1st June 2015. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai, in S.S.S. Construction v/s ACIT, ITA no.3495 to 3504/Ch./2019, vide order dated 22/04/2022, has considered this issue by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High

SACHIN RAMESH HOLEY,WARDHA vs. ITO WARD 1, WARDHA, WARDHA

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

14, 2014–15 respectively. The amendment to the provisions of section 200A of the Act came into effect from 1st June 2015. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai, in S.S.S. Construction v/s ACIT, ITA no.3495 to 3504/Ch./2019, vide order dated 22/04/2022, has considered this issue by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High

SACHIN RAMESH HOLEY,WARDHA vs. ITO WARD 1, WARDHA, WARDHA

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

14, 2014–15 respectively. The amendment to the provisions of section 200A of the Act came into effect from 1st June 2015. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai, in S.S.S. Construction v/s ACIT, ITA no.3495 to 3504/Ch./2019, vide order dated 22/04/2022, has considered this issue by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High

SACHIN RAMESH HOLEY,WARDHA vs. ITO WARD 1, WARDHA, WARDHA

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

14, 2014–15 respectively. The amendment to the provisions of section 200A of the Act came into effect from 1st June 2015. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai, in S.S.S. Construction v/s ACIT, ITA no.3495 to 3504/Ch./2019, vide order dated 22/04/2022, has considered this issue by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High

SACHIN RAMESH HOLEY,WARDHA vs. ITO WARD 1, WARDHA, WARDHA

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

14, 2014–15 respectively. The amendment to the provisions of section 200A of the Act came into effect from 1st June 2015. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai, in S.S.S. Construction v/s ACIT, ITA no.3495 to 3504/Ch./2019, vide order dated 22/04/2022, has considered this issue by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High