PADMA PARAKH, RAJNANDGAON,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.560, 561 & 562/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Padma Parakh Parakh Nursing Home, Lal Bagh, Rajnandgaon-491 441 (C.G.) Pan: Ajqpp8601H

2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E 6 Padma Parakh Vs. ITO (TDS) ITA Nos. 560, 561 & 562/RPR/2025 was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A

PADMA PARAKH, RAJNANDGAON,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, BHILAI, BHILAI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.560, 561 & 562/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Padma Parakh Parakh Nursing Home, Lal Bagh, Rajnandgaon-491 441 (C.G.) Pan: Ajqpp8601H

2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E 6 Padma Parakh Vs. ITO (TDS) ITA Nos. 560, 561 & 562/RPR/2025 was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A

JANTA INDUSTRIES,BASPAIPARA vs. MS.RANJINI SRIKUMAR, INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS), INCOME TAX OFFICE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.46 & 47/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Janta Industries Durga Talkies Road, Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Pan: Aaffj9101J ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer (Tds) Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Bengaluru ……""यथ" / Respondent

2) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be. (3) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall be paid before delivering or causing to be delivered a statement in accordance with sub-section (3) of section

JANTA INDUSTRIES,BASPAIPARA vs. MS.RANJINI SRIKUMAR, INCOMETAX OFFICER(TDS), INCOME TAX OFFICE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.46 & 47/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Janta Industries Durga Talkies Road, Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Pan: Aaffj9101J ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer (Tds) Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc) Bengaluru ……""यथ" / Respondent

2) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectible, as the case may be. (3) The amount of fee referred to in sub-section (1) shall be paid before delivering or causing to be delivered a statement in accordance with sub-section (3) of section

TOUCHSTONE SERVICES P. LTD.,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BHILAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.68 & 69/Rpr/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Touchstone Services P. Ltd., V The Income Tax C/O.Uday Raj Parakh, S Officer(Tds), Bhilai, “Mangaldeep”, G.E.Road, Ground Floor, Aayakar Rajnandgaon (C.G.) – 491441 Bhawan, New Civic Centre, Pan: Aacct 6932 F Bhilai, Dist. Durg(C.G) – 490006. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri G.N.Singh – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 12/12/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Are Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee I.E. Touchstone Services Pvt. Ltd., For The A.Y.2013-14 & 2014-15 Against The Two Separate Orders Of Ld.Cit(A)[Nfac] Dated 05.08.2021. Both These Appeals Were Clubbed, Heard Together & Disposed Of By A Common Order. For The Sake Of Convenience We Take The Appeal No.68/Rpr/2021 For A.Y.2013-14 Treated As Lead Case. The Assessee For A.Y.2013-14 Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1) On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Cit(A) Erred In Upholding Demand Raised In Respect Of Levying Fee U/S 234E In Intimation U/S 200A For Default In Furnishing Tds Statements So Far As Period Prior To 01.06.2015 By Ignoring Binding Decisions Of Hon’Ble Jurisdictional It At, Raipur Bench In Cases Of "Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank & Others Vs. Ito (Tds) Dt. 23.06.2016 Reported In (2016) 29 Itj 310" And

2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of fee under section 234E in the course of processing of TDS returns and intimation u/s 200A

TOUCHSTONE SERVICES P. LTD.,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), DURG

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.68 & 69/Rpr/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Touchstone Services P. Ltd., V The Income Tax C/O.Uday Raj Parakh, S Officer(Tds), Bhilai, “Mangaldeep”, G.E.Road, Ground Floor, Aayakar Rajnandgaon (C.G.) – 491441 Bhawan, New Civic Centre, Pan: Aacct 6932 F Bhilai, Dist. Durg(C.G) – 490006. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri G.N.Singh – Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 12/12/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Are Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee I.E. Touchstone Services Pvt. Ltd., For The A.Y.2013-14 & 2014-15 Against The Two Separate Orders Of Ld.Cit(A)[Nfac] Dated 05.08.2021. Both These Appeals Were Clubbed, Heard Together & Disposed Of By A Common Order. For The Sake Of Convenience We Take The Appeal No.68/Rpr/2021 For A.Y.2013-14 Treated As Lead Case. The Assessee For A.Y.2013-14 Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1) On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Cit(A) Erred In Upholding Demand Raised In Respect Of Levying Fee U/S 234E In Intimation U/S 200A For Default In Furnishing Tds Statements So Far As Period Prior To 01.06.2015 By Ignoring Binding Decisions Of Hon’Ble Jurisdictional It At, Raipur Bench In Cases Of "Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank & Others Vs. Ito (Tds) Dt. 23.06.2016 Reported In (2016) 29 Itj 310" And

2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of fee under section 234E in the course of processing of TDS returns and intimation u/s 200A

HE DISTRICT MARKETING OFFICER, CHHATTISGARH,RAIPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.291/Rpr/2016 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 District Marketing Officer, The Ito (Tds), Chhattisgarh State Co-Operative Vs Raipur (Cg). Marketing Federation Limited, Near Hotel Atithi, Near Railway Station, Jagdalpur (Cg). Tan: Jbpc0191B Appellant/Assessee Respondent / Revenue Applicant By Shri Nikhilesh Beghani Respondent By Shri G.N. Singh Date Of Hearing 03/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19/12/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-I, Raipur, Dated 01.03.2016For Assessment Year 2013-14Emanating From The Order Of Ito (Tds) U/S 201(1) & 201(1A) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Also Called As ‘The Act’)Dated 18.03.2014. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal: “Ground No.I That The Ex-Parte Appellate Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) ("The Ld.Cit(A)") Is Highly Unjustified, Bad In Law, Without Providing Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard & Not In Accordance With The Provisions Of Law. It Is

TDS statements / returns in the present set of appeals for the period prior to 01.06.2015, was not empowered to charge ITA No.291/RPR/2016, for A.Y. 2013-14 Dist. Marketing Officer, Chhattisgarh State Co-op. Marketing Federation fees under section 234E of the Act. Hence, the intimation issued by the Assessing Officer under section 200A of the Act in all these appeals

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BILASPUR,BILASPUR vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee company is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 43/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. South Eastern Coalfields Limited Seepat Road, Sarkanda, Bilaspur (C.G.)-495006 Pan: Aadcs2066E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

TDS credit. 13. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld.CIT(A), NFAC erred in not adjudicating the ground raised for initiating penalty proceedings on account of disallowance relating to amortization of leased land compensation expenses. 14. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in not adjudicating the ground raised for initiating penalty proceedings on account

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

2. Amend intimation or demand initiation under section 143(1) 3. Amend intimation under section 200A(1) ………………. 154(7) save as otherwise…………… no amendment under the section shall be made after expiry of four years ……… The Income Tax Authorities referred under section 116 may amend any ORDER passed by it or order u/s. 200A, if found any mistake apparent from

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

2. Amend intimation or demand initiation under section 143(1) 3. Amend intimation under section 200A(1) ………………. 154(7) save as otherwise…………… no amendment under the section shall be made after expiry of four years ……… The Income Tax Authorities referred under section 116 may amend any ORDER passed by it or order u/s. 200A, if found any mistake apparent from

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

2. Amend intimation or demand initiation under section 143(1) 3. Amend intimation under section 200A(1) ………………. 154(7) save as otherwise…………… no amendment under the section shall be made after expiry of four years ……… The Income Tax Authorities referred under section 116 may amend any ORDER passed by it or order u/s. 200A, if found any mistake apparent from

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

2. Amend intimation or demand initiation under section 143(1) 3. Amend intimation under section 200A(1) ………………. 154(7) save as otherwise…………… no amendment under the section shall be made after expiry of four years ……… The Income Tax Authorities referred under section 116 may amend any ORDER passed by it or order u/s. 200A, if found any mistake apparent from

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

2. Amend intimation or demand initiation under section 143(1) 3. Amend intimation under section 200A(1) ………………. 154(7) save as otherwise…………… no amendment under the section shall be made after expiry of four years ……… The Income Tax Authorities referred under section 116 may amend any ORDER passed by it or order u/s. 200A, if found any mistake apparent from

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

2. Amend intimation or demand initiation under section 143(1) 3. Amend intimation under section 200A(1) ………………. 154(7) save as otherwise…………… no amendment under the section shall be made after expiry of four years ……… The Income Tax Authorities referred under section 116 may amend any ORDER passed by it or order u/s. 200A, if found any mistake apparent from

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

2. Amend intimation or demand initiation under section 143(1) 3. Amend intimation under section 200A(1) ………………. 154(7) save as otherwise…………… no amendment under the section shall be made after expiry of four years ……… The Income Tax Authorities referred under section 116 may amend any ORDER passed by it or order u/s. 200A, if found any mistake apparent from

8TH BATALIAN INDIA RESERVE CAF,RAJNANDGAON vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

2. Amend intimation or demand initiation under section 143(1) 3. Amend intimation under section 200A(1) ………………. 154(7) save as otherwise…………… no amendment under the section shall be made after expiry of four years ……… The Income Tax Authorities referred under section 116 may amend any ORDER passed by it or order u/s. 200A, if found any mistake apparent from

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

2) are culled out as under: “5. Decision: I have considered the submissions of AA, Form 35 and grounds of appeal along with statement of facts and order passed by LJAO. Brief fact of the appeal is that appellant was 3 Nikita Kingrani Vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad ITA Nos.226 to 231/RPR/2023 issued intimation u/s 200A of the Income

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

2) are culled out as under: “5. Decision: I have considered the submissions of AA, Form 35 and grounds of appeal along with statement of facts and order passed by LJAO. Brief fact of the appeal is that appellant was 3 Nikita Kingrani Vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad ITA Nos.226 to 231/RPR/2023 issued intimation u/s 200A of the Income

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

2) are culled out as under: “5. Decision: I have considered the submissions of AA, Form 35 and grounds of appeal along with statement of facts and order passed by LJAO. Brief fact of the appeal is that appellant was 3 Nikita Kingrani Vs. DCIT, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad ITA Nos.226 to 231/RPR/2023 issued intimation u/s 200A of the Income