EISWAR EAXPORTS,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-6,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blem/S. Eswar Exports, Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-6, D.No. 23-14-13, Chinnamvari Visakhapatnam. Street, Visakhapatnam. Tan No. Vpne00441A (Appellant) (Respondent)

195 Taxman 323) noted that once taxes are deducted, the deductor is duty bound to remit the same into the Government account in compliance to section 201(1) of the Act. The Addl. CIT(TDS) also rejected the plea of the assessee that TDS sums would be remitted only after preparation of books. The Addl.CIT (TDS) thus concluded that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SRI NARASIMHARAJU KANUMURI, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.267/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Narasimharaju Income Tax, Kanumuri, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aerpk2717F (Appellant) (Respondent)

TDS provisions under Section 194H, if any, would be relevant for the payments to the resident intermediaries and no obligation was cast under Section 195 of the Act. 7. The CIT(A), after perusing the submissions of the assessee, called for a “remand report” from the A.O. In reply, the A.O., in his remand report, relied on the documents that

G M CONSTRUCTIONS,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. CIT, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.508/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2012-13) M/S G.M.Constructions Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax C/O Sunil Kumar Gautam Visakhapatnam 18-36-1, Kothasalipeta Maharanipeta Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aakfg5978M] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.07.2019 आदेश /O R D E R

section 195(1) of the Act, it shows that the payments made to the NRIs required to be applied for the deduction of tax at source, but not the pending payments or payments due. In the instant case, the development agreement is entered on 30.06.2009, relevant to the F.Y. 2010-11 and A.Y.2011-12. As per the agreement, the construction should

INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SURENDRA NATH GUBBALA, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Us:

TDS) were deposited, and only the balance amount of Rs. 28,41,320/- was received in his bank account. 4. The A.O observed, that the assessee while computing the “capital gain” on the sale of the subject properties during the year under consideration, had reduced the abovementioned payments aggregating to Rs. 9 crores (supra) as an expenditure that was claimed

SMT. VASIREDDY JYOTHI.,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ITO.,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.281/Viz/2017 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2012-2013) Smt.Vasireddy Jyothi Income Tax Officer D.No.1-83-36/1, G-1, Ramtej Enclave Ward-3(1) Sector-4, Mvp Colony Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Akqpv2349R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri C.V.S.Murthy, Ar प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr

195 of the Act and the assessee has neither deducted the TDS nor paid such tax to Govt. of India account. The assessee has claimed the expenditure in the impugned A.Y. and the same is covered by section 40(a)(i) and the AO has not examined the issue at the time of assessment. Therefore, the AO has committed

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), , GUNTUR vs. NSL TEXTILES LIMITED, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee-company M/s. NSL Textiles Ltd., engaged in the business of manufacturing of grey fabric & dyeing, yarn, ginning & pressing of cotton and garments trading, filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 on 27/09/2012 admitting total loss of Rs. 168,14,97,811/- under the normal provisions

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), , GUNTUR vs. NSL TEXTILES LIMITED,, GUNTUR

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee-company M/s. NSL Textiles Ltd., engaged in the business of manufacturing of grey fabric & dyeing, yarn, ginning & pressing of cotton and garments trading, filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 on 27/09/2012 admitting total loss of Rs. 168,14,97,811/- under the normal provisions

VOBILINENI SURYA PRASAD,,KAKINADA vs. THE DCIT(IT & TP),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.348/Viz/2016 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2009-2010) Vobilineni Surya Prasad Vs. Ddit (It & Tp) D.No.67-3-14/2 Visakhapatnam Kakinada East Godavari Dist. [Pan : Acopv9063E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

TDS under s. 195 will only arise when payment is made by the said ShriParamjit Singh to the actual owners of land sold. There is no ambiguity about the legal position insofar as in the question as to whether the payments to the resident can be covered by s. 195 of the Act. This section only applies to payments which

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1) (TDS), VIJAYAWADA vs. M/S SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P. LTD., TIRUPATHI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.452-454/Viz/2010 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Ys : 2008-09 To 2010-11 Respectively) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Southern Power Circle-3(1) (Tds) Distribution Company Of Vijayawada A.P.Limited Behind Srinivasa Kalyana Mandapam Kesavavayana Gunta Tirupati [Pan : Hydso8188F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1217/H/2010,517/Viz/2019 &518/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/A.Ys : 2008-09 To 2010-11 Respectively) M/S Southern Power Distribution Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Company Of A.P.Limited Income Tax Behind Srinivasa Kalyana Mandapam Circle-3(1) (Tds) Kesavavayana Gunta Vijayawada Tirupati [Pan : Hydso8188F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri C.P.Rama Swami, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.10.2019

2 to section 9(1)(vi) of the Income tax Act and held that the transmission charges and SLDC charges paid by the assessee for the use of transmission network owned by AP Transco fall within the definition of royalty. Thus, held that the provisions of section 194J are squarely applicable for deduction of tax at source. 8 I.T.A. No.452-454/Viz/2010

THE SOCIETY FOR COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.435/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2021-22) The Society For Collegiate Education V. Dcit (Exemptions) Exemption Circle D.No. 52-14-75 Income Tax Office New Resapuvanipalem C.R. Building “Annex” Visakhapatnam – 530013 M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada – 520002 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaatt9499E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

TDS credit for Rs. 1,736/-. 3. Aggrieved by the rectification order, assessee filed an appeal before Ld.CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi. Simultaneously, the Assessee also filed one more rectification petition before CPC, against the rectification order passed on 24.02.2023. Since the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was filed with delay of 193 days. Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal

LAKSHMI PRASUNAMBA KODALI,HYDERABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 279/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Lakshmi Prasunamba Kodali, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income Tax, Pan: Cxrpk7177G Circle-International Tax, Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri S.V. Rao Associates ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 10/09/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 25/09/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

TDS related to section 195 (Non-business ITR)”. Accordingly, notice U/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued. Due to change

GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S Balakrishnanआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.456, 457 & 458/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Government Polytechnic, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Tds Ward-1, Pan: Aaagg1122Q Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A payable under Section 234E. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel

GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S Balakrishnanआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.456, 457 & 458/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Government Polytechnic, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Tds Ward-1, Pan: Aaagg1122Q Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A payable under Section 234E. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel

GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S Balakrishnanआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.456, 457 & 458/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Government Polytechnic, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Tds Ward-1, Pan: Aaagg1122Q Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A payable under Section 234E. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel

KOLLIPARAAPPARAO COTTON MILLS PVT LTD,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), GUNTUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: the Ld.CIT(A) and explained the reasons for the delay in filing the return and prayed to condone the delay to advance substantial justice on the ground that the issue involved therein, on merits, is with respect to levy of late filing fee under Section 234E of the Act is now covered in favour of the assessee by various decisions, as per which there is no provision under the Act to levy late filing fee before insertion of Section 200A by Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 01.06.2015. However, the Ld.A

2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A payable under Section 234E. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel

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

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are

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

2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A payable under Section 234E. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel

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

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are

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

2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A payable under Section 234E. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel

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

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are

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

2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A payable under Section 234E. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel

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

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are

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

2), it can be said that a particular set up for imposition and the payment of fee under Section 234E was provided but, it did not provide for making of demand of such fee under Section 200A payable under Section 234E. Hence, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel