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

section 194C(6) w.e.f. 16-2015 an exemption has been provided to transporters owning up to 10 goods carriages and prior to that date, there was no exemption provided u/s 194C(6) of the Act from TDS

ITO (TDS), WARD-2(3),, CHANDRAPUR vs. ACC LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.73 To 76/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 Ito (Tds), Ward-2(3), Vs. Acc Ltd., Chandrapur- 442401. Chanda Cement Works, P.O. Cement Nagar, Chandrapur, Dist.- Chandrapur, Chandrapur - 442502. Pan : Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap Assessee By : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.12.2016 Quashing The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Ward-2(3), Chandrapur U/S 201(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.73/Nag/2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

TDS Officer misconstrued the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C, which is not the requirements of law that

ITO (TDS), WARD-2(3),, NAGPUR vs. ACC LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.73 To 76/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 Ito (Tds), Ward-2(3), Vs. Acc Ltd., Chandrapur- 442401. Chanda Cement Works, P.O. Cement Nagar, Chandrapur, Dist.- Chandrapur, Chandrapur - 442502. Pan : Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap Assessee By : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.12.2016 Quashing The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Ward-2(3), Chandrapur U/S 201(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.73/Nag/2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

TDS Officer misconstrued the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C, which is not the requirements of law that

ITO (TDS), WARD-2(3),, CHANDRAPUR vs. ACC LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.73 To 76/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 Ito (Tds), Ward-2(3), Vs. Acc Ltd., Chandrapur- 442401. Chanda Cement Works, P.O. Cement Nagar, Chandrapur, Dist.- Chandrapur, Chandrapur - 442502. Pan : Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap Assessee By : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.12.2016 Quashing The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Ward-2(3), Chandrapur U/S 201(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.73/Nag/2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

TDS Officer misconstrued the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C, which is not the requirements of law that

ITO (TDS), WARD-2(3),, CHANDRAPUR vs. ACC LTD.,, CHANDRAPUR

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.73 To 76/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014-15 Ito (Tds), Ward-2(3), Vs. Acc Ltd., Chandrapur- 442401. Chanda Cement Works, P.O. Cement Nagar, Chandrapur, Dist.- Chandrapur, Chandrapur - 442502. Pan : Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap Assessee By : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Date Of Hearing : 20.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2023 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Common Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 26.12.2016 Quashing The Order Passed By The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Ward-2(3), Chandrapur U/S 201(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years 2011-12 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Revenue, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal Of The Revenue In Ita No.73/Nag/2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Are Stated Herein.

TDS Officer misconstrued the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 194C, which is not the requirements of law that

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD.,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

TDS. However, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act and passed impugned order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act. In assessment order (“different services”) and held that the services were not covered by the provisions of section 194C(6

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD., CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

TDS. However, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act and passed impugned order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act. In assessment order (“different services”) and held that the services were not covered by the provisions of section 194C(6

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD.,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

TDS. However, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act and passed impugned order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act. In assessment order (“different services”) and held that the services were not covered by the provisions of section 194C(6

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD.,

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

TDS. However, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act and passed impugned order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act. In assessment order (“different services”) and held that the services were not covered by the provisions of section 194C(6

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD., CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

TDS. However, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act and passed impugned order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act. In assessment order (“different services”) and held that the services were not covered by the provisions of section 194C(6

I.T.O.(T.D.S.) WARD 2(3), CHANDRAPUR vs. BILT GRAPHIC PAPER PROUDUCTS LTD., CHANDRAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA

TDS. However, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 194C(1) of the Act and passed impugned order u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act. In assessment order (“different services”) and held that the services were not covered by the provisions of section 194C(6

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

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), NAGPUR vs. VIDARBHA INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

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

section 133(6) and confirmed of providing services to the assessee company and receipt of payment from it. They also provided copy of agreement, their bank statements and audited financial statements. In the assessment order Id. AO held that though the two companies have shown this amount as income in their P&L a/c but they are majorly engaged

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 234E of the Sunilkumar Rajendra Rai vs TDS Ward, Nagpur ITA no.286/Nag./2023 Act cannot be levied for the period prior to 01.06.2015, because, there was no enabling provision to levy such late fee. 6

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

6. In the present appeals, on perusal of the facts, we find that the assessment years involved are prior to 01.06.2015. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the late fee charged by the Assessing Officer under section 234E of the Act, while processing quarterly TDS

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

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

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

6. In the present appeals, on perusal of the facts, we find that the assessment years involved are prior to 01.06.2015. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the late fee charged by the Assessing Officer under section 234E of the Act, while processing quarterly TDS

ACIT, CHANDRAPUR CIRCLE,, CHANDRAPUR vs. SHRI AVEREL GANGADHAR SHETTY, CHANDRAPUR

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTCIAL PURPOSES

Bench: Shri Parth Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 193/Nag/2017 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2014-15

TDS wrongly made twice amounting to Rs.20,65,367/-, the appellant has not been able to satisfactorily file reconciliation statement and explain the nature of transaction. Therefore, addition amounting to Rs.20,65,367/- out of total addition of Rs.4,45,75,433/- is confirmed. A0 is directed to delete the remaining addition. Ground of appeal is Partly Allowed. (Emphasis supplied

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

6. In the present appeals, on perusal of the facts, we find that the assessment years involved are prior to 01.06.2015. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the late fee charged by the Assessing Officer under section 234E of the Act, while processing quarterly TDS