BULDANA URBAN CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITD AND NATIONAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION (J.V),BULDANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , TDS WARD 1(2), AKOLA

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

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble

section 206C(7) of the Act with regard to charging of interest was introduced by Finance Act, 2012 and was thus not applicable to any years prior to that. 8. The AOP and its members are not separate entities, therefore no TCS was required to be collected from its member. Even, in the remand report, learned CIT(A) has admitted

BULDANA URBAN CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITD AND NATIONAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION (J.V),BULDANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , TDS WARD 1(2), AKOLA

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

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Hon’Ble

section 206C(7) of the Act with regard to charging of interest was introduced by Finance Act, 2012 and was thus not applicable to any years prior to that. 8. The AOP and its members are not separate entities, therefore no TCS was required to be collected from its member. Even, in the remand report, learned CIT(A) has admitted

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. ULTRATECH CEMENT LTD UNIT AWARPUR CEMENT WORKS,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ram Lal Negi

TDS in compliance with provisions of section 194C(6) is required to be cancelled. In Such facts, tne action or the Id. AO of raising the demand

M/S HLA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. DY, CIT(TDS) CIR. 1, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

TDS) ..…….………. Respondent Circle–1, AayakarBhawan Civil Lines, Nagpur 440 001 Assessee by : Shri NareshJakhotia, C.A. Revenue by : Shri Vitthal M. Bhosale, Jt. CIT–DR Date of Hearing – 20.04.2022 Date of Order – 21.04.2022 2 M/s. HLA Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. M/s. BHLA Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. O R D E R PER BENCH The captioned appeals have been filed by two different assessee

SHEPHALI ANIL MALVIYA,NAGPUR vs. DCIT,CPC,TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeals (Ms

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

7. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We have also given considerable thought to the facts and circumstances involved in all these cases. It is observed on perusal of Section 200 sub section (3) r.w.s. 206C sub-section (3) proviso that when the assessee has deducted TDS

THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,,NAGPUR vs. I.T.O. T.D.S. WARD 2-(1), NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Mahavir Singh

Section 206C(1C) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’). For this, the assessee, in all the five years, has raised identically worded grounds, and the grounds as raised in ITA No.102/Nag/2017 for assessment year 2011-12 read as under :- “1. That the order passed u/s 206C(6A) and 206C(7) by the learned Income Tax Officer TDS

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

7. Brief facts are, in the present case, the assessee is a trust. The assessee belatedly filed its quarterly e–TDS statements in Form–26Q for the assessment year 2013–14 and 2015–15. Since there was delay in filing the statements, the Centralized Processing Centre (TDS) while processing them under section 200A of the Act charged late filing

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

7. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We have also given considerable thought to the facts and circumstances involved in all these cases. It is observed on perusal of Section 200 sub section (3) r.w.s. 206C sub-section (3) proviso that when the assessee has deducted TDS

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

7. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We have also given considerable thought to the facts and circumstances involved in all these cases. It is observed on perusal of Section 200 sub section (3) r.w.s. 206C sub-section (3) proviso that when the assessee has deducted TDS

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

7. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We have also given considerable thought to the facts and circumstances involved in all these cases. It is observed on perusal of Section 200 sub section (3) r.w.s. 206C sub-section (3) proviso that when the assessee has deducted TDS

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

7. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We have also given considerable thought to the facts and circumstances involved in all these cases. It is observed on perusal of Section 200 sub section (3) r.w.s. 206C sub-section (3) proviso that when the assessee has deducted TDS

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

7. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We have also given considerable thought to the facts and circumstances involved in all these cases. It is observed on perusal of Section 200 sub section (3) r.w.s. 206C sub-section (3) proviso that when the assessee has deducted TDS

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

7. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We have also given considerable thought to the facts and circumstances involved in all these cases. It is observed on perusal of Section 200 sub section (3) r.w.s. 206C sub-section (3) proviso that when the assessee has deducted TDS

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

7. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We have also given considerable thought to the facts and circumstances involved in all these cases. It is observed on perusal of Section 200 sub section (3) r.w.s. 206C sub-section (3) proviso that when the assessee has deducted TDS

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

7. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We have also given considerable thought to the facts and circumstances involved in all these cases. It is observed on perusal of Section 200 sub section (3) r.w.s. 206C sub-section (3) proviso that when the assessee has deducted TDS

M/S RAJYAS SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

7. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We have also given considerable thought to the facts and circumstances involved in all these cases. It is observed on perusal of Section 200 sub section (3) r.w.s. 206C sub-section (3) proviso that when the assessee has deducted TDS

M/S CHAMPAK MINES AND MINERALS ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTATN COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the 111 appeals preferred by the different assessees

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

7. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We have also given considerable thought to the facts and circumstances involved in all these cases. It is observed on perusal of Section 200 sub section (3) r.w.s. 206C sub-section (3) proviso that when the assessee has deducted TDS

M/S BALAJI VENTURES PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. DY, CIT(TDS) CIR. 1, NAGPUR

Bench: Sh. Vikram Singh Yadav & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.M/S. Balaji Ventures Pvt. Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner Of Income “Krishna House”, Tax (Tds), 71/A, S.T.Bus Vs. Circle-1, Nagpur Stand Road, Ganeshpeth, Nagpur-440 018 Pan: Ngpd0 2781C (Respondent) (Appellant)

TDS), 71/A, S.T.Bus Vs. Circle-1, Nagpur Stand Road, Ganeshpeth, Nagpur-440 018 PAN: NGPD0 2781C (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) Appellant by Sh. NareshJakhotia, CA Respondent by Sh. VitthalBhosale,Jt. CIT-DR Date of Hearing 06.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement 08.06.2022 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income