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

15 Bank of India bank in respect of its Umred Branch having TAN No. NGPB03048D filed its TDS statement (Form 26Q) for Q4 of FY 2012–13 on 15.07.2013 as against the due date of 15.05.2013 leading to a delay of 61 days. The ACIT TDS –CPC processed the TDS statement and issued an intimation u/s 143(1) under dated

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

15 Bank of India bank in respect of its Umred Branch having TAN No. NGPB03048D filed its TDS statement (Form 26Q) for Q4 of FY 2012–13 on 15.07.2013 as against the due date of 15.05.2013 leading to a delay of 61 days. The ACIT TDS –CPC processed the TDS statement and issued an intimation u/s 143(1) under dated

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

15. 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 (supra) has considered this issue by following the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in Fatehraj Singhvi v/s Union of India

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 68 of the Act. The grounds no.3 to 6, are reproduced below for A.Y. 2014–15:– “3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld CIT(A) has erred in sustaining addition of Rs.12,00,000 on the count of unsecured loan treating it as unexplained credits u/s68, when, on the date of search

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 68 of the Act. The grounds no.3 to 6, are reproduced below for A.Y. 2014–15:– “3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld CIT(A) has erred in sustaining addition of Rs.12,00,000 on the count of unsecured loan treating it as unexplained credits u/s68, when, on the date of search

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 68 of the Act. The grounds no.3 to 6, are reproduced below for A.Y. 2014–15:– “3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld CIT(A) has erred in sustaining addition of Rs.12,00,000 on the count of unsecured loan treating it as unexplained credits u/s68, when, on the date of search

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 68 of the Act. The grounds no.3 to 6, are reproduced below for A.Y. 2014–15:– “3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld CIT(A) has erred in sustaining addition of Rs.12,00,000 on the count of unsecured loan treating it as unexplained credits u/s68, when, on the date of search

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 68 of the Act. The grounds no.3 to 6, are reproduced below for A.Y. 2014–15:– “3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld CIT(A) has erred in sustaining addition of Rs.12,00,000 on the count of unsecured loan treating it as unexplained credits u/s68, when, on the date of search

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

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

section 68 of the Act. The grounds no.3 to 6, are reproduced below for A.Y. 2014–15:– “3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld CIT(A) has erred in sustaining addition of Rs.12,00,000 on the count of unsecured loan treating it as unexplained credits u/s68, when, on the date of search

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 relevant to the assessment year 2013–14 and 2014–15

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, 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 relevant to the assessment year 2013–14 and 2014–15

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 relevant to the assessment year 2013–14 and 2014–15

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 relevant to the assessment year 2013–14 and 2014–15

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

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 Court

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

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 Court

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

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 Court