GORAKSHAN SABHA, NAGPUR,NAGPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC), MOF, GOI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.92 & 91/Nag/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2013-14 Gorakshan Sabha, The Income Tax Officer, Near Hitawada Press, V Ward Exemption, Nagpur. Wardha Road, Dhantoli, S Nagpur – 440012. Pan: Aaatg2927L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Abhay Y. Marathe - Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 28/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Under Section 250 Of The Act, Emanating From The Common Intimation Of Outstanding Demand Order For A.Y.2014-15 & 2013-14 Respectively. Since Facts Of Both Appeals Are Similar, We Take Up Appeal For A.Y.2014-15 As

c) r.w.s. 234E was introduced vide F.A. 2015 w.e.f. 01/06/2015, as such the order u/s 200A is illegal and without jurisdiction.(iii)That in absence of provi. in the statute, the impugned order is invalid and bad in law. (iv)That the Ld. CIT- A has not considered the basic fact of charging of late fee with retrospective effect

SAINATH VIDYALAYA,MAKKEPALLI vs. ITO, TDS WARD-52(3), CHANDRAPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

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 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period

SAINATH VIDYALAYA,MAKKEPALLI vs. ITO,TDS WARD-52(3), CHANDRAPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are\nallowed

c) to (f) of sub-section\n(1) of Section 200A can be read as having\nprospective effect and not having retroactive\ncharacter or effect. Resultantly, the demand under\nSection 200A for computation and intimation for the\npayment of fee under Section 234E could not be\nmade in purported exercise of power under Section\n200A by the respondent

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.

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 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period

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.

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 200A for computation and intimation for the payment of fee under Section 234E could not be made in purported exercise of power under Section 200A by the respondent for the period

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

TDS return under section 200A of the Act under sub–clause (c) of sub–section 1. There is a delay

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 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [“learned CIT”], for the assessment year 2013-14. Sunilkumar Rajendra Rai vs TDS Ward, Nagpur ITA no.286/Nag./2023 The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:– 2. “ Grounds of Appeal Tax Effect 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in condoning the delay

DIGP GC CRPF,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CELL, TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Digp Gc Crpf, Nagpur Dcit, Central Processing Cell, Offices Of The Digp Group Centre, Vs Tds, Hingna Road, Digdoh Hills, Midc Area, Tds Cpc, Aayakar Bhawan, Sector Nagpur, Maharashtra – 440019. –3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, Uttar [Pan: Aaaagd0143E] Pradesh – 201010. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kapil Hirani, Advocate Revenue By Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 25.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

c) to section 200A(1) was inserted only from 01.06.2015. On similar set of fact in assessees group case, similar late fees for various quarters for A.Y. 2014–15 and 2015–16 were deleted in ITA Nos. 176/Nag/2019 to 181/Nag/2019 dated 21.02.2020. 3. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. DR) for the Revenue relied upon

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

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

section 200A(1)(c) authorising such levy came into force w.e.f. 1st June, 2015 by Finance Act, 2015. In the present case, when the assessee filed the TDS

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), CIRICLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravisl.

c) of section 200A(1) was inserted by the Finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 01-06-2015 providing for the levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act. In that view of the matter, such fee u/s.234E can be levied only for the default committed after 01-06-2015 and not prior to that. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Olari

M/S. KURUP ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT. LTD. ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravisl.

c) of section 200A(1) was inserted by the Finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 01-06-2015 providing for the levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act. In that view of the matter, such fee u/s.234E can be levied only for the default committed after 01-06-2015 and not prior to that. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Olari

M/S. KURUP ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT. LTD. ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravisl.

c) of section 200A(1) was inserted by the Finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 01-06-2015 providing for the levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act. In that view of the matter, such fee u/s.234E can be levied only for the default committed after 01-06-2015 and not prior to that. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Olari

M/S. KURUP ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT. LTD. ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravisl.

c) of section 200A(1) was inserted by the Finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 01-06-2015 providing for the levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act. In that view of the matter, such fee u/s.234E can be levied only for the default committed after 01-06-2015 and not prior to that. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Olari

M/S. KURUP ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT. LTD. ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravisl.

c) of section 200A(1) was inserted by the Finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 01-06-2015 providing for the levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act. In that view of the matter, such fee u/s.234E can be levied only for the default committed after 01-06-2015 and not prior to that. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Olari

M/S. KURUP ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT. LTD. ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravisl.

c) of section 200A(1) was inserted by the Finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 01-06-2015 providing for the levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act. In that view of the matter, such fee u/s.234E can be levied only for the default committed after 01-06-2015 and not prior to that. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Olari

M/S. KURUP ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT. LTD. ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravisl.

c) of section 200A(1) was inserted by the Finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 01-06-2015 providing for the levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act. In that view of the matter, such fee u/s.234E can be levied only for the default committed after 01-06-2015 and not prior to that. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Olari

M/S. KURUP ENGINEERING COMPANY PVT. LTD. ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravisl.

c) of section 200A(1) was inserted by the Finance Act 2015 w.e.f. 01-06-2015 providing for the levy of fee u/s.234E of the Act. In that view of the matter, such fee u/s.234E can be levied only for the default committed after 01-06-2015 and not prior to that. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Olari