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

8. In nut shell, the deduction u/s. 80P case of assessee shall have been allowable on the extended income (generated by disallowing such expenses/provisions & contingencies). The said view finds support from the judgment of Jurisdictional Bombay High Court and Pune ITAT. An operating paragraphs of aforesaid judgments is reproduced for your kind perusal :- CIT V/s Gem Plus Jewellery India

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

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

2,81,33,000/- is not required to be reduced. Issue: Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS 3.4 The assessee submits that, it had deducted TDS at the rate of one percent amounting to Rs. 12,52,000/- on sale consideration of Rs. 12,52,00,000/-. The assessee has duly paid

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

2,81,33,000/- is not required to be reduced. Issue: Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS 3.4 The assessee submits that, it had deducted TDS at the rate of one percent amounting to Rs. 12,52,000/- on sale consideration of Rs. 12,52,00,000/-. The assessee has duly paid

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

2 Hinganghat Nagri Sahakari Pat Sanstha ITA no.569/Nag./2024 after the return was filed within Assessment Proceeding as on 17.01.2023 bearing Ack No. 923756621170123 which is acknowledged in the Assessment Order itself. 3. That the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had erred in law and facts in confirming addition made by Learned AO to the Income of Appellant to the extent

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

2 Hinganghat Nagri Sahakari Pat Sanstha ITA no.569/Nag./2024 after the return was filed within Assessment Proceeding as on 17.01.2023 bearing Ack No. 923756621170123 which is acknowledged in the Assessment Order itself. 3. That the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had erred in law and facts in confirming addition made by Learned AO to the Income of Appellant to the extent

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

2 Hinganghat Nagri Sahakari Pat Sanstha ITA no.569/Nag./2024 after the return was filed within Assessment Proceeding as on 17.01.2023 bearing Ack No. 923756621170123 which is acknowledged in the Assessment Order itself. 3. That the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had erred in law and facts in confirming addition made by Learned AO to the Income of Appellant to the extent

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

8. Applicability of the provisions of section 147/151 to the facts of the case: In this case, the assessee having taxable income, has not paid her taxes due for A.Y. 2015-16, thus income has escaped the assessment. Therefore in the light of above discussion, I have reasons to believe that this is a fit case of invoking the provisions

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

8 Bank of India PAN No: AAACB0472C v/s ACIT, CPC,TDS(Ghaziabad) ..…….………. Respondent Uttar Pradesh–201 010 ITA Nos.135,141& 150/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2014–15) Bank of India, Butibori Branch Nagpur Zonal Office 3rd Floor, CSD department Kingsways …………… Appellant Nagpur–440 001 PAN No: AAACB0472C v/s ACIT, CPC,TDS(Ghaziabad) Uttar Pradesh–201 010 ..…….………. Respondent ITA Nos.139,142& 151/Nag

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

8 Bank of India PAN No: AAACB0472C v/s ACIT, CPC,TDS(Ghaziabad) ..…….………. Respondent Uttar Pradesh–201 010 ITA Nos.135,141& 150/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2014–15) Bank of India, Butibori Branch Nagpur Zonal Office 3rd Floor, CSD department Kingsways …………… Appellant Nagpur–440 001 PAN No: AAACB0472C v/s ACIT, CPC,TDS(Ghaziabad) Uttar Pradesh–201 010 ..…….………. Respondent ITA Nos.139,142& 151/Nag

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

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

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

TDS have been deducted which was confirmed by the Assessing Officer. For better appreciation of facts, Exception (v) of section 194A of the Act is reproduced below:– “(v) to such income credited or paid by a co-operative society (other than a co-operative bank) to a member thereof or to such income credited or paid by a co-operative

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

TDS have been deducted which was confirmed by the Assessing Officer. For better appreciation of facts, Exception (v) of section 194A of the Act is reproduced below:– “(v) to such income credited or paid by a co-operative society (other than a co-operative bank) to a member thereof or to such income credited or paid by a co-operative

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

TDS have been deducted which was confirmed by the Assessing Officer. For better appreciation of facts, Exception (v) of section 194A of the Act is reproduced below:– “(v) to such income credited or paid by a co-operative society (other than a co-operative bank) to a member thereof or to such income credited or paid by a co-operative

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–2

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–2

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

8 years during which the appellant would have filed many TDS forms, TDS returns, Income Tax Returns etc on portal and it is not acceptable that the accountant failed to notice the impugned order, 2. It is the responsibility of the person, who is supposed to make compliance as per law and not his employee or his counsel, to ensure

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

In the result, appeal by the assessee for A

TDS is deducted. It is seen that the assessee has not\nfiled his return of income for AY 2015-16. The above transactions, total to\namount Rs.1,32,51,842/- remain unexplained and there is escapement of\nincome in absence of return of income filed. Thus income from above\ntransaction has not been offered

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.

2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A payable under Section 234E. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel