MARIAPPAN AUSTIN PRAKASH,BENGALURU, KANRNATAKA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTL TXN CIRCLE, VISAKHAPATNAM

195 of the Act. Assessee claimed the income as\nexempt and claimed refund of the tax deducted by the ZBL. The case was\nselected for scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices under section 143(2) and\n142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. After verification of\nthe submissions made by the assessee

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

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 EDUCTIONAL 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

ADABALA MANMOHAN,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.135/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-12) Mr. Adabala Manmohan, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-International Taxation, Pan: Vpnao 1959 G Visakhapatnam. (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar

TDS. 4. Without prejudice to the above grounds, Ld. CIT(A) ought to have taken cognizance of the fact that when the said capital gains was assessed and tax demand was raised in the hands of the said NRI payee, under such circumstances, upholding the finding of the AO that the appellant is assessee in default

ARABOLU VENKATA NAGA DEEPATHI REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, N. SATYARAMANUJAMM ,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.178/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2010-11) Smt.Arabolu Venkata Naga Deepthi Vs. Income Tax Officer Rep. By Power Of Attorney Holder (International Taxation) Smt. N.Satyaramanujam Visakhapatnam Flat No.403, Dhanna Apartments Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Atcpa6413A] (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

2. The Ld. AO is not correct in charging interest under section 234A; 234B and 234C and the Id. CIT (Appeals) is not correct in confirming the levy/charge of interest. 3. The above grounds are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to one another. 4. The appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter, modify, delete

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. RAVIKUMAR BURUGUPALLI, WEST GODAVARI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita No. 198/Viz/2025 निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year:2016-17) Dy. Cit (International Taxation) V. Ravikumar Burugupalli Income Tax Office Proprietor Sasi Fuel Infinity Towers, Ground Floor Sasi School, Main Road Sankaramatam Road Velivenu Post Visakhapatnam - 530016 West Godavari District – 534329 [Pan:Ajzpb2139H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. No. 38/Viz/2025 [आयकरअपीलसं.से उत्पन्न/I.T.A.No.198/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2016-17)] Ravikumar Burugupalli V. Dy. Cit (International Taxation) Proprietor Sasi Fuel Income Tax Office Sasi School, Main Road Infinity Towers, Ground Floor Velivenu Post Sankaramatam Road Visakhapatnam - 530016 West Godavari District – 534329 [Pan:Ajzpb2139H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Smt A. Aruna, Advocate राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

TDS on the above payments towards purchase of the property. Ld. AO thereafter issued a show-cause notice dated 22.12.2020 requiring the assessee to show cause why the order under section 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act should not be passed considering the assessee as “assessee in default”. The assessee submitted response to the Ld.AO stating that