BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

164 results for “TDS”+ Section 10(14)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,878Delhi3,853Bangalore2,021Chennai1,379Kolkata884Pune558Hyderabad505Ahmedabad445Jaipur327Raipur315Indore297Karnataka272Cochin245Chandigarh233Nagpur210Surat174Visakhapatnam164Rajkot114Lucknow82Cuttack72Amritsar71Ranchi46Patna41Jodhpur41Dehradun40Telangana33Panaji31Agra31Guwahati30SC19Allahabad15Jabalpur14Kerala12Calcutta10Himachal Pradesh8Varanasi7Rajasthan6Uttarakhand3Punjab & Haryana2Orissa2J&K2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 234E264Section 200A203Section 143(3)74TDS69Condonation of Delay34Section 4028Addition to Income28Section 153A26Section 143(2)25Section 43B

GANGUNAIDU SABBAVARAPU,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), VISAKHPATNAM

ITA 177/VIZ/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jun 2025AY 2023-24
Section 10(37)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(37)Section 250Section 254Section 96

10. A long line of authorities establish clearly that an assessee is entitled to\nraise additional grounds not merely in terms of legal submissions, but also\nadditional claims to wit claims not made in the return filed by it. It is necessary\nfor us to refer to some of these decisions only to deal with two submissions on\nbehalf

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. VIZAG SEAPORT PVT. LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 164 · Page 1 of 9

...
18
Disallowance16
Section 14814
ITA 383/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Apr 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon‟Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon‟Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 383/Viz/2017 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2012-13) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vizag Seaport Pvt Ltd., Income Tax, Administrative Block, Circle-5(1), S4 Gallery, Port Area, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam – 530035. (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) [Pan :Aabcv2484K] अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri Fenil A Bhatt, Ar प्रत्याथी की ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनिाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15/02/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of : /04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Pers. Balakrishnan:

For Appellant: Sri Fenil A Bhatt, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

14,41,000 4. Provision for doubtful debts 23,82,970 4. Disallowance of pay leaves and sick leaves (Rs. 12,01,926 10,48,088 + Rs. 1,53,838) Aggrieved by the above additions, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) while considering the submissions made by the assessee‟s Representative relied

MOHAMMED VAZIRUDDIN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 190/VIZ/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196 & 197/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Mohammed Vaziruddin Vs. Income Tax Officer, Educational Society, Tds-Ward-1, Prakash Nagar, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaaam 3067 G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 15/12/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 2Section 200ASection 234E

10. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi vs. Union of India [2016] 73 taxmann.com 252 (Karnataka) observed that “one may at the first blush say that, since the section 234E is a charging section for fee, the liability was generated or had accrued, if there was failure to deliver or cause to be delivered

MOHAMMED VAZIRUDDIN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 192/VIZ/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196 & 197/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Mohammed Vaziruddin Vs. Income Tax Officer, Educational Society, Tds-Ward-1, Prakash Nagar, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaaam 3067 G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 15/12/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 2Section 200ASection 234E

10. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi vs. Union of India [2016] 73 taxmann.com 252 (Karnataka) observed that “one may at the first blush say that, since the section 234E is a charging section for fee, the liability was generated or had accrued, if there was failure to deliver or cause to be delivered

MOHAMMED VAZIRUDDIN EDUCTIONAL SOCIETY,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 191/VIZ/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196 & 197/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Mohammed Vaziruddin Vs. Income Tax Officer, Educational Society, Tds-Ward-1, Prakash Nagar, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaaam 3067 G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 15/12/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 2Section 200ASection 234E

10. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi vs. Union of India [2016] 73 taxmann.com 252 (Karnataka) observed that “one may at the first blush say that, since the section 234E is a charging section for fee, the liability was generated or had accrued, if there was failure to deliver or cause to be delivered

MOHAMMED VAZIRUDDIN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 193/VIZ/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196 & 197/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Mohammed Vaziruddin Vs. Income Tax Officer, Educational Society, Tds-Ward-1, Prakash Nagar, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaaam 3067 G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 15/12/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 2Section 200ASection 234E

10. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi vs. Union of India [2016] 73 taxmann.com 252 (Karnataka) observed that “one may at the first blush say that, since the section 234E is a charging section for fee, the liability was generated or had accrued, if there was failure to deliver or cause to be delivered

MOHAMMED VAZIRUDDIN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 194/VIZ/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196 & 197/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Mohammed Vaziruddin Vs. Income Tax Officer, Educational Society, Tds-Ward-1, Prakash Nagar, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaaam 3067 G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 15/12/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 2Section 200ASection 234E

10. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi vs. Union of India [2016] 73 taxmann.com 252 (Karnataka) observed that “one may at the first blush say that, since the section 234E is a charging section for fee, the liability was generated or had accrued, if there was failure to deliver or cause to be delivered

MOHAMMED VAZIRUDDIN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 195/VIZ/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196 & 197/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Mohammed Vaziruddin Vs. Income Tax Officer, Educational Society, Tds-Ward-1, Prakash Nagar, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaaam 3067 G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 15/12/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 2Section 200ASection 234E

10. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi vs. Union of India [2016] 73 taxmann.com 252 (Karnataka) observed that “one may at the first blush say that, since the section 234E is a charging section for fee, the liability was generated or had accrued, if there was failure to deliver or cause to be delivered

MOHAMMED VAZIRUDDIN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 197/VIZ/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196 & 197/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Mohammed Vaziruddin Vs. Income Tax Officer, Educational Society, Tds-Ward-1, Prakash Nagar, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaaam 3067 G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 15/12/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 2Section 200ASection 234E

10. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi vs. Union of India [2016] 73 taxmann.com 252 (Karnataka) observed that “one may at the first blush say that, since the section 234E is a charging section for fee, the liability was generated or had accrued, if there was failure to deliver or cause to be delivered

MOHAMMED VAZIRUDDIN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 196/VIZ/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196 & 197/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Mohammed Vaziruddin Vs. Income Tax Officer, Educational Society, Tds-Ward-1, Prakash Nagar, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaaam 3067 G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 15/12/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 2Section 200ASection 234E

10. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Fatheraj Singhvi vs. Union of India [2016] 73 taxmann.com 252 (Karnataka) observed that “one may at the first blush say that, since the section 234E is a charging section for fee, the liability was generated or had accrued, if there was failure to deliver or cause to be delivered

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ALFA ELECTRONIC SERVICES(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPTNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITA 50/VIZ/2021[213-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos. 50, 51 & 53/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Acit – Circle – 1(1) V. M/S. Alfa Electronic Services (India) Prathyakshakar Bhavan, Sector – 8 Private Limited Mvp Double Road, 49-22-5, Sri Sai Mansions Visakhapatnam – 530017 Lalitha Nagar, Visakhapatnam – 530016 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aahca3583E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 68

section 68 of the Act with respect to the Trade Creditor M/s. Electronic Mechanical Engineering Services. The Ld.CIT(A) also by relying on the decision of ITAT, Visakhapatnam Bench in the case of Hindustan shipyard limited in ITA No. 59/Vizag/2016 deleted the additions made on account of delayed payment of Provident Fund. The Ld.CIT(A) thus partly allowed the appeal

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ALFA ELECTRONIC SERVICES(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPTNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITA 51/VIZ/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos. 50, 51 & 53/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Acit – Circle – 1(1) V. M/S. Alfa Electronic Services (India) Prathyakshakar Bhavan, Sector – 8 Private Limited Mvp Double Road, 49-22-5, Sri Sai Mansions Visakhapatnam – 530017 Lalitha Nagar, Visakhapatnam – 530016 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aahca3583E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 68

section 68 of the Act with respect to the Trade Creditor M/s. Electronic Mechanical Engineering Services. The Ld.CIT(A) also by relying on the decision of ITAT, Visakhapatnam Bench in the case of Hindustan shipyard limited in ITA No. 59/Vizag/2016 deleted the additions made on account of delayed payment of Provident Fund. The Ld.CIT(A) thus partly allowed the appeal

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ALFA ELECTRONIC SERVICES(INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed

ITA 53/VIZ/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos. 50, 51 & 53/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Acit – Circle – 1(1) V. M/S. Alfa Electronic Services (India) Prathyakshakar Bhavan, Sector – 8 Private Limited Mvp Double Road, 49-22-5, Sri Sai Mansions Visakhapatnam – 530017 Lalitha Nagar, Visakhapatnam – 530016 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aahca3583E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 68

section 68 of the Act with respect to the Trade Creditor M/s. Electronic Mechanical Engineering Services. The Ld.CIT(A) also by relying on the decision of ITAT, Visakhapatnam Bench in the case of Hindustan shipyard limited in ITA No. 59/Vizag/2016 deleted the additions made on account of delayed payment of Provident Fund. The Ld.CIT(A) thus partly allowed the appeal

ARKHA SOLAR POWER PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJAHMUNDARY vs. DCIT-1 , KAKINADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 92/VIZ/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam22 Dec 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.92/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2017-18) Arkha Solar Power Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax-1, Elakolanu Village, 4Th Floor, Sri Deepthi Towers, Rangampeta, Rajahmundry, Main Road, Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh – 533294. Andhra Pradesh-533001. Pan: Aalca 4293K (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Ms. Karishma R. Phatarphekar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Ms. Karishma R. PhatarphekarFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C(1)

TDS of Rs. 10,67,625/-. On examination of the TP documents for benchmarking the transaction, the Ld. TPO concurred with the CUP method as the most appropriate method under the given facts of the case. The Ld. TPO also observed that the assessee’s selection of final comparables is inappropriate and arbitrary. The Ld. TPO rejected the ALP determined

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VIJAYAWADA vs. FYSOLATE TECHNOLOGIES, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 182/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.182/Viz/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Fysolate Technologies, Income Tax, Vijayawada. Vijawayada. Pan: Aacff5633L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri Mithilesh Sannareddy ""याथ" क" ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 15/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri Mithilesh SannareddyFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

TDS vs. Tata Teleservices Ltd [2022] 134 taxmann.com 323 (Delhi – Trib.) 4. DCIT vs. M/s. Flextronics Software Systems Ltd in ITA No. 2881/Del/2011, dated 23/04/2021. 5. CIT vs. Suretech Hospital and Research Centre [2007] 293 ITR 53 (Bom.) 6. ITO vs. M/s. Raj Maitry & Eskon Developer in ITA No. 2117/Mum/2023, dated 29/01/2024. The Ld. AR also referred

INDIRA VOONA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 244/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 244/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Indira Voona V. Income Tax Officer – Ward 3(1) Visakhapatnam Plot No. 24, Sector 12 Mvp Colony, Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aewpv1518E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 268/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Income Tax Officer – Tds Ward -1 Indira Voona V. Visakhapatnam Plot No. 24, Sector 12 Mvp Colony, Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aewpv1518E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

14) of section 2; (b) “immovable property” means any land (other than agricultural land) or any building or part of a building. Page No. 9 I.T.A. No. 244 & 268/VIZ/2023 Indira Voona 20. From the plain reading of the section, we noticed that “transferee” responsible for paying to a resident “transferor” any sum by way of consideration for transfer

INDIRA VOONA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD 1, , VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 268/VIZ/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 244/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Indira Voona V. Income Tax Officer – Ward 3(1) Visakhapatnam Plot No. 24, Sector 12 Mvp Colony, Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aewpv1518E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 268/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Income Tax Officer – Tds Ward -1 Indira Voona V. Visakhapatnam Plot No. 24, Sector 12 Mvp Colony, Visakhapatnam – 530017 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aewpv1518E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

14) of section 2; (b) “immovable property” means any land (other than agricultural land) or any building or part of a building. Page No. 9 I.T.A. No. 244 & 268/VIZ/2023 Indira Voona 20. From the plain reading of the section, we noticed that “transferee” responsible for paying to a resident “transferor” any sum by way of consideration for transfer

SRI SEETARAMANJANENYA SORTEX,KAKINADA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 147/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.147/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Sri Seetaramanjaneya Sortex Vs. Principal Commissioner Of 1-2015/A, Uppalanka Income Tax Kakinada Visakhapatnam [Pan : Abdfs4641P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Paradeep Tayal & OrsFor Respondent: Dr.Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 194A(3)(i)Section 194A(3)(iii)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

14,111/- to Govt. Account after the due dates prescribed in the ESI Act. Hence the same is disallowed u/s 36(1)(va) of I.T Act. 3 I.T.A. No.147/Viz/2023, A.Y.2018-19 Sri Seetaramanjaneya Sortex, Kakinada iv. On perusal of Form-3CD (Col.No.34a), it is seen that the assessee has deducted TDS from the following expenditure and has not deposited

S V V S S D S S SCHOOL,ANNAVARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, eight appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 88/VIZ/2023[2017-18 (Q3-24Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Apr 2023

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.74 To 89/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2017-18) Svvssdss School, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Annavaram. Tds, Ward-1, Pan: Afipa 2580 C Rajahmundry. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 03/04/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 200ASection 234E

10. The Pune Bench of the Tribunal vide its order dated 25/10/2018 in the case of Medical Superintendent Rural Hospital, Nashik vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS) (supra), has observed as under: “16…………..the Assessing Officer while processing TDS returns / statements for the period prior to 01/06/2015 was not empowered to charge late filing fees under section 234E of the Act, even

S V V S S D S S SCHOOL,ANNAVARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

In the result, eight appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 85/VIZ/2023[2016-17 (Q4-24Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Apr 2023

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.74 To 89/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2017-18) Svvssdss School, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Annavaram. Tds, Ward-1, Pan: Afipa 2580 C Rajahmundry. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 03/04/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 200ASection 234E

10. The Pune Bench of the Tribunal vide its order dated 25/10/2018 in the case of Medical Superintendent Rural Hospital, Nashik vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS) (supra), has observed as under: “16…………..the Assessing Officer while processing TDS returns / statements for the period prior to 01/06/2015 was not empowered to charge late filing fees under section 234E of the Act, even