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

condone the delay of 117 days in filing the appeals before the Tribunal and proceed to decide the appeals on merits. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case assessment order that the assessee is running an educational institution viz., Sainath Vidyalaya Makkepalli entrusted by the Government. The Assessing Officer-TDS-CPC [TRACES] levied late fee u/sec.234E for filing the return

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,GHAZIABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONE OF INCOMDE EF, GAZIABADQQQ.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

section 234E does not empower the Assessing Officer to condone the delay in late filing of the return/statements of tax deducted

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST ,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

section 234E does not empower the Assessing Officer to condone the delay in late filing of the return/statements of tax deducted

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

section 234E does not empower the Assessing Officer to condone the delay in late filing of the return/statements of tax deducted

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

section 234E does not empower the Assessing Officer to condone the delay in late filing of the return/statements of tax deducted

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

section 234E does not empower the Assessing Officer to condone the delay in late filing of the return/statements of tax deducted

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

section 234E does not empower the Assessing Officer to condone the delay in late filing of the return/statements of tax deducted

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

section 234E does not empower the Assessing Officer to condone the delay in late filing of the return/statements of tax deducted

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

section 234E does not empower the Assessing Officer to condone the delay in late filing of the return/statements of tax deducted

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

section 234E does not empower the Assessing Officer to condone the delay in late filing of the return/statements of tax deducted

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

section 234E does not empower the Assessing Officer to condone the delay in late filing of the return/statements of tax deducted

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

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

condonation of delay,\nwherein appeals were filed beyond the period prescribed.\nThe assessee had filed appeals against the order passed\nunder section 154 of the Act, hence the time period of\nappeals filed by assessee before the CIT(A) have to be\ncomputed from the date of order passed under section\n154 of the Act and not from the date

BANK OF INDIA,UMRED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CPC.TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

234E of the Act for the assessment year 2013–14 and 2014–15. The amendment to the provisions of section 200A of the Act came into effect from 1st June 2015. The Co–ordinate Bench of the Bank of India, Panchgaon Branch ITA no.93/Nag./2023 ITA no.94/Nag./2023 ITA no.95/Nag./2023 Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai, in S.S.S. Construction (supra

BANK OF INDIA, ARMORI ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

234E of the Act for the assessment year 2013–14 and 2014–15. The amendment to the provisions of section 200A of the Act came into effect from 1st June 2015. The Co–ordinate Bench of the Bank of India, Panchgaon Branch ITA no.93/Nag./2023 ITA no.94/Nag./2023 ITA no.95/Nag./2023 Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai, in S.S.S. Construction (supra

BANK OF INDIA, PANCHGAON,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

In the result, both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

234E of the Act for the assessment year 2013–14 and 2014–15. The amendment to the provisions of section 200A of the Act came into effect from 1st June 2015. The Co–ordinate Bench of the Bank of India, Panchgaon Branch ITA no.93/Nag./2023 ITA no.94/Nag./2023 ITA no.95/Nag./2023 Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Chennai, in S.S.S. Construction (supra

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 1. There is a delay of 94 days in filing appeal before us. The appellant had placed an affidavit explaining the causes of delay. Being satisfied with the sufficient reasons, we condone the same and proceed for adjudication. The appellant deductor filed Form No.24Q on 11/12/2014, for the 4. Fourth Quarter (Q4) ending 31/03/2013, as against the due date

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

delay on the part of the assessee in belated return before filing of the TDS statement in Form no.26Q, hence, the assessee was liable to pay late filing fee of ` 5,400. When the 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

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

delay on the part of the assessee in belated return before filing of the TDS statement in Form no.26Q, hence, the assessee was liable to pay late filing fee of ` 5,400. When the 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