Search: condonation of delay

HARDEEP SINGH,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO(TDS)J, JAMSHEDPUR

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

ITA 353/RAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi21 May 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Periwal, CA(AR)For Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, ACIT(DR)

condone the delay of 91 days in filing both the appeals and both the appeals are heard on merits. 3. The sole issue involved in both the appeals of the assessee is that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of AO levying late fee u/s.234E of the Act for delay in filing quarterly statement. 4. Brief facts

HARDEEP SINGH,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO(TDS)J, JAMSHEDPUR

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

ITA 354/RAN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi21 May 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Periwal, CA(AR)For Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, ACIT(DR)

Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

condone the delay of 91 days in filing both the appeals and both the appeals are heard on merits. 3. The sole issue involved in both the appeals of the assessee is that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of AO levying late fee u/s.234E of the Act for delay in filing quarterly statement. 4. Brief facts

M/S VIKAS SAMITIES,JAMSHEDPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, RANCHI

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

ITA 355/RAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Periwal, CA(AR)For Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, ACIT(DR)

Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

condonation of delay to which the ld. DR did not object to appeals are heard on merits. 3. The sole issue involved in both the appeals of the assessee is that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of AO levying late fee u/s.234E of the Act for delay in filing quarterly statement. 4. Brief facts of the case

M/S VIKAS SAMITIES,JAMSHEDPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, RANCHI

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

ITA 356/RAN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi30 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Pawan Periwal, CA(AR)For Respondent: Shri P.K.Mondal, ACIT(DR)

Section 154Section 200ASection 234E

condonation of delay to which the ld. DR did not object to appeals are heard on merits. 3. The sole issue involved in both the appeals of the assessee is that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of AO levying late fee u/s.234E of the Act for delay in filing quarterly statement. 4. Brief facts of the case