ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal for the A

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

TDS. We thus do not find reason to interfere with the first appellate order on the issue. The same is upheld. The issue is thus decided against the revenue. The above judicial pronouncement has also been followed by co- ordinate Bench of same (Pune) Tribunal in case of :- Jay Tuljabhavani Sah. Patpedhi Pragati V/s ITO (ITAT Pune) Relevant Para

ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR vs. THE NIRMAL UJWAL CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY LTD, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year

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

TDS, details of Bank Accounts and details of various other expenses, etc. The appellant through his AR explained the case from time to time. From the documents submitted and 4 The Nirmal Ujwal Credit Co–operative Society Ltd. A.Y. 2012–13 explanations provided by the appellant, the AO notices that the appellant had earned interest income from Fixed Deposits with

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

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

section 200A of the Act for the\nprocessing of quarterly TDS return filed by the assessee.\n7. In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed.\"\n8. We find that the above decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in S.S.S.\nConstruction (supra) is squarely applies to the assessee's case. Apart from\nthis, the issue is also

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

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

19, 2020–21 & 2022–23 ITA no.566/Nag./2024 Assessment Year – 2015–16 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. That the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in Law as well as in Facts by sustaining the addition of Rs.41,88,448/- as Income from other Source of Income and the attributes of activity carried

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

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

19, 2020–21 & 2022–23 ITA no.566/Nag./2024 Assessment Year – 2015–16 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. That the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in Law as well as in Facts by sustaining the addition of Rs.41,88,448/- as Income from other Source of Income and the attributes of activity carried

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

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

19, 2020–21 & 2022–23 ITA no.566/Nag./2024 Assessment Year – 2015–16 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. That the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in Law as well as in Facts by sustaining the addition of Rs.41,88,448/- as Income from other Source of Income and the attributes of activity carried

VIVEKANAND NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PULGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

19,47,890) under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard the rival arguments, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the Assessing Officer has made disallowance ` 5,84,367, under section

VIVEKANAND NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PULGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

19,47,890) under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard the rival arguments, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the Assessing Officer has made disallowance ` 5,84,367, under section

VIVEKANAND NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PULGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

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

19,47,890) under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard the rival arguments, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the Assessing Officer has made disallowance ` 5,84,367, under section

VIJAY VINOD DURAGKAR,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(4), NAGPUR

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

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

19,62,440/- and Income from other sources of Rs.1,65, 122/-. 2. Brief details of information collected/received by the AO: In this case, the information received from ACIT, Circle-4, Nagpur that the assessee had purchased immovable property jointly with her husband Shri Vinod Durugkar for sale consideration of Rs.1,53,02,000/- and market value of Rs.7

LATITUDE INFRAVENTURES,NAGPUR vs. PCIT,NAGPUR-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017–18

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

TDS of Rs.12,52,000 has been duly deposited with government and hence, disallowance under section 40a(ia) is not warranted. 8 Latitude Infraventures ITA no.349 & 350/Nag./2024 A.Y. 2016–17 & 2017–18 3.5 Therefore, the issues sought to be revised by the learned CIT does not result into any prejudice to the Revenue. Therefore, the twin condition of order

LATITUDE INFRAVENTURES,NAGPUR vs. PCIT,NAGPUR-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017–18

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

TDS of Rs.12,52,000 has been duly deposited with government and hence, disallowance under section 40a(ia) is not warranted. 8 Latitude Infraventures ITA no.349 & 350/Nag./2024 A.Y. 2016–17 & 2017–18 3.5 Therefore, the issues sought to be revised by the learned CIT does not result into any prejudice to the Revenue. Therefore, the twin condition of order

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

2. The appellant craves leave to add or alter any other ground that may be taken at the time of hearing of this case.” 3. The only issue involved in all these appeals is, whether the Assessing Officer can levy late fee prescribed under section 234E of the Sanjay Gandhi Smruti Vidya Mandir ITA no.149/Nag./2023 Act, when the quarterly

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

section 200A of the Act for the processing of quarterly TDS return filed by the assessee. 7. In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed." 6 Ashwin Suresh Chandak 8. We find that the above decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in S.S.S. Construction (supra) is squarely applies to the assessee’s case. Apart from this

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

section 200A of the Act for the processing of quarterly TDS return filed by the assessee. 7. In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed." 6 Dammani Industries ITA no.121/Nag./2024 8. We find that the above decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in S.S.S. Construction (supra) is squarely applies to the assessee’s case. Apart

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

section 200A of the Act for the processing of quarterly TDS return filed by the assessee. 7. In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed." 8. We find that the above decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in S.S.S. Construction (supra) is squarely applies to the assessee’s case. Apart from this, the issue is also

DIGP GROUP CENTRE CRPF,NAGPUR vs. DCIT CPC(TDS) , GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.294 & 295/Nag/2022 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Digp Group Centre Crpf, Vs. Dcit, Cpc (Tds), D/O The Office Of The Digp Ghaziabad. Group Centre, Hingna Road, Digdoh Hills, Midc Area, Nagpur- 440019. Pan : Aaagd0143E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Hirani Revenue By : Smt. Rashmi Mathur Date Of Hearing : 17.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac’] Dated 15.12.2021 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.294/Nag/2022 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Are Stated Herein.

19. Hence, it can be said that, the mechanism provided for enforceability of Section 200(3) or 206C (3) for filing of the statement by making it penal under Section 272A (2) (k) is done away in view of the insertion of Section 271H providing for penal provision for such failure to submit return. When the Parliament has simultaneously brought

DIGP GC CRPF,NAGPUR vs. DCIT CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.294 & 295/Nag/2022 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Digp Group Centre Crpf, Vs. Dcit, Cpc (Tds), D/O The Office Of The Digp Ghaziabad. Group Centre, Hingna Road, Digdoh Hills, Midc Area, Nagpur- 440019. Pan : Aaagd0143E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kapil Hirani Revenue By : Smt. Rashmi Mathur Date Of Hearing : 17.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac’] Dated 15.12.2021 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.294/Nag/2022 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Are Stated Herein.

19. Hence, it can be said that, the mechanism provided for enforceability of Section 200(3) or 206C (3) for filing of the statement by making it penal under Section 272A (2) (k) is done away in view of the insertion of Section 271H providing for penal provision for such failure to submit return. When the Parliament has simultaneously brought

HINGANGHAT NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,HINGANGHAT vs. INCOME TAX WARD-1, WARDHA

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

19, 2020–21 & 2022-23\nITA no.566/Nag./2024\n Assessment Year – 2015-16\n2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:-\n“1. That the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in Law as well as in Facts\nby sustaining the addition of Rs.41,88,448/- as Income from other Source of\nIncome and the attributes of activity carried