KERMAN MINOCHER BUHARIWALA,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in giving effect to the levy of late fee in the course of intimation under section 200A

KERMAN MONOCHER BUHARIWALA,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in giving effect to the levy of late fee in the course of intimation under section 200A

KERMAN MINOCHER BUHARIWALA,NA vs. ARIVS.ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in giving effect to the levy of late fee in the course of intimation under section 200A

RANJITBHAI AMBUBHAI PATEL,BILIMORA vs. ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

200A of the IT Act, 1961. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the DCIT, CPC TDS should have initiated separate proceedings under section 234E”. 2

RANJITBHAI AMBUBHAI PATEL,BILIMORA vs. ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

200A of the IT Act, 1961. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the DCIT, CPC TDS should have initiated separate proceedings under section 234E”. 2

RANJITBHAI AMBUBHAI PATEL,BILIMORA vs. ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

200A of the IT Act, 1961. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the DCIT, CPC TDS should have initiated separate proceedings under section 234E”. 2

RANJITBHAI AMBUBHAI PATEL,BILIMORA vs. ACIT, CPC TDS, BANGLORE

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

200A of the IT Act, 1961. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as also law on subject, the DCIT, CPC TDS should have initiated separate proceedings under section 234E”. 2

DESAI INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,NA vs. ARIVS.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, VALSAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and as also on law learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in giving effect to the levy of late fee in the course of intimation under section 200A

DESAI INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,NA vs. ARIVS.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, VALSAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and as also on law learned DCIT, CPC TDS has erred in giving effect to the levy of late fee in the course of intimation under section 200A

STATE BANK OF INDIA (AHWA BRANCH),,DANG vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC GHAZIABAD,, GAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3419 & 3420/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15 State Bank Of India, Assistant Commissioner Vyara Branch, Navsari Of Income Tax(Cpc) Pan: Aaacs 8577 K Ghaziabad अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

200A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(CPC) Ghaziabad (in short “the AO”). 2. The above appeals were heard together and being decides by common order for the sake of brevity and convenience. I.T.A.No. 3419/AHD/2016/ A.Y. 2013-14; 3. The Ground No. 1 relates to non condoning delay in filing

STATE BANK OF INDIA (VYARA BRANCH),,NA vs. ARIVS.THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC GHAZIABAD,, GAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3419 & 3420/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15 State Bank Of India, Assistant Commissioner Vyara Branch, Navsari Of Income Tax(Cpc) Pan: Aaacs 8577 K Ghaziabad अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

200A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(CPC) Ghaziabad (in short “the AO”). 2. The above appeals were heard together and being decides by common order for the sake of brevity and convenience. I.T.A.No. 3419/AHD/2016/ A.Y. 2013-14; 3. The Ground No. 1 relates to non condoning delay in filing

STATE BANK OF INDIA (VYARA BRANCH),,NA vs. ARIVS.THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC GHAZIABAD,, GAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3419 & 3420/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15 State Bank Of India, Assistant Commissioner Vyara Branch, Navsari Of Income Tax(Cpc) Pan: Aaacs 8577 K Ghaziabad अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

200A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(CPC) Ghaziabad (in short “the AO”). 2. The above appeals were heard together and being decides by common order for the sake of brevity and convenience. I.T.A.No. 3419/AHD/2016/ A.Y. 2013-14; 3. The Ground No. 1 relates to non condoning delay in filing

STATE BANK OF INDIA (AHWA BRANCH),,DANG vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC GHAZIABAD,, GAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3419 & 3420/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15 State Bank Of India, Assistant Commissioner Vyara Branch, Navsari Of Income Tax(Cpc) Pan: Aaacs 8577 K Ghaziabad अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

200A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(CPC) Ghaziabad (in short “the AO”). 2. The above appeals were heard together and being decides by common order for the sake of brevity and convenience. I.T.A.No. 3419/AHD/2016/ A.Y. 2013-14; 3. The Ground No. 1 relates to non condoning delay in filing

STATE BANK OF INDIA (AHWA BRANCH),,DANG vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC GHAZIABAD,, GAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3419 & 3420/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15 State Bank Of India, Assistant Commissioner Vyara Branch, Navsari Of Income Tax(Cpc) Pan: Aaacs 8577 K Ghaziabad अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

200A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax(CPC) Ghaziabad (in short “the AO”). 2. The above appeals were heard together and being decides by common order for the sake of brevity and convenience. I.T.A.No. 3419/AHD/2016/ A.Y. 2013-14; 3. The Ground No. 1 relates to non condoning delay in filing

ALTRET INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , TDS, CPC, SURAT

TDS - CPC\n(in short, 'AO') raised demand of Rs.14,170/- due to short payment of tax of\nRs.10,750/- and consequential interest of Rs.3,240/-.\n4.\nAggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed appeals before the\nCIT(A). The CIT(A) issued 4 notices, which is at para 2 of the appellate order.\nThere was non-compliance

MANSI RINKESHKUMAR RATHOD,SURAT vs. ITO, TDS, WARD-1, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.699/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Physical Hearing) Mansi Rinkeshkumar Rathod, Vs. Tds, Cpc, Ayakar Bhawan, 4-A/2, Yogi Krupa Society, New Sector – 3, Up – 201010. Civil Road, Surat - 395007 Jurisdiction: Tds, Ward – 1, Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ciapr0584A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/05/2025

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in ITA No.699/SRT/2024/AY.2019-20 Mansi Rinkeshkumar Rathod confirming the action of the learned ACIT, CPC-TDS in charging interest of Rs.25,512/- on default short payment of TDS. 3. On the facts

ALTRET INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, CPC, SURAT

TDS - CPC\n(in short, 'AO') raised demand of Rs.14,170/- due to short payment of tax of\nRs.10,750/- and consequential interest of Rs.3,240/-.\n4.\nAggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed appeals before the\nCIT(A). The CIT(A) issued 4 notices, which is at para 2 of the appellate order.\nThere was non-compliance

ALTRET INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,ALTRET HOUSE, SAIYEDPURA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, CPC, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

2. 811 to 2013-14 Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd., ITO, 812/SRT/2024 12/2881, Altret House, TDS, CPC Saiyedpura Main Road, Gujarat – 395003 PAN: AAECA7918E 3. 814 to 2015-16 Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd., ITO, 815/SRT/2024 12/2881, Altret House, TDS, CPC Saiyedpura Main Road, Gujarat – 395003 PAN: AAECA7918E 4. 816 & 2014-15 Altret Industries Pvt. Ltd., ITO, 818/SRT/2024 12/2881, Altret House, TDS