HEMANT ENTERPRISES,NASHIK vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, NASHIK, NASHIK

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda, Vice- & Ms. Astha Chandra

194, section 194A, section 194B, section 194BB, section 194C, section 194D, section 194E, section 195 and section 196A, the assessee shall not be called upon to pay the tax himself to the extent to which tax has been deducted from that income." 8 ITA.No.394/PUN/2025 (Hemant Enterprises) 20. From the language of section 205, it is clear that once

GOKHALE CONSTRUCTIONS,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

TDS provisions of section 194-IC of the IT Act as TDS @ 10% was not deducted on monetary consideration paid

PASHANKAR AUTO WHEELS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. CIT(A) CIRCLE-4, PUNE

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

TDS statement – Rent (section 194-I) 4,50,000 2 3. He, therefore, passed an order u/s 148A(d) of the Act on 26.03.2022 after

WALVEKAR BROTHERS & CO,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(2),, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

194, section194A, section 194B, section 194BB, section 194C, section 194D, section 194E, section 195 and section 196A, the assessee shall not be called upon to pay the tax himself to the extent to which tax has been deducted from that income” 20. From the language of section 205, it is clear that once the tax is deducted at source

MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT RURAL HOSPITAL,,SINNAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

JUNAGADE HEALTHCARE PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (T D S),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT RURAL HOSPITAL,,SINNAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

JUNAGADE HEALTHCARE PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (T D S),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT RURAL HOSPITAL,,SINNAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

JUNAGADE HEALTHCARE PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (T D S),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

JUNAGADE HEALTHCARE PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (T D S),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

JUNAGADE HEALTHCARE PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (T D S),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT RURAL HOSPITAL,,SINNAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT RURAL HOSPITAL,,SINNAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (TDS),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

JUNAGADE HEALTHCARE PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (T D S),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

JUNAGADE HEALTHCARE PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (T D S),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

JUNAGADE HEALTHCARE PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (T D S),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union

JUNAGADE HEALTHCARE PVT.LTD,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (T D S),, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge fees under section 234E of the Act. Accordingly, late filing fees charged under section 234E of the Act was deleted. He further referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Fatheraj Singhvi Vs. Union