BALAJEE CONSTRUCTIONS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS WARD-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

2. Finally the appeal was filed on 6/12/2022 causing a delay of 16 days. 3….. 4….. 3. After hearing the submissions of the Ld. AR as well as on perusal of the contents of the condonation petition filed by the 3 assessee, we are of the view that the assessee was prevented by a reasonable and sufficient cause in filing

M/S. vs. R INFOTECH ,,VISAKHAPATNAMVS.THE ITO ,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted. 5. In this case, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act originally on 30.8.2010 accepting the income returned. The assessee filed return of income admitting total income of ` 2,50,220/- on 29.8.2008. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened u/s 148 of the Act on 29.2.2012 for verification

M/S. vs. R INFOTECH ,,VISAKHAPATNAMVS.THE ITO ,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted. 5. In this case, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act originally on 30.8.2010 accepting the income returned. The assessee filed return of income admitting total income of ` 2,50,220/- on 29.8.2008. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened u/s 148 of the Act on 29.2.2012 for verification

SUPERINTENDENT OF JAILS CENTRAL PRISION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals (I

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.194, 195 & 196/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Ays: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Superintendent Of Jails, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Prison, Tds Ward-1, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaags 7227 N (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 11/05/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: The Captioned Appeals (I.T.A. No.194, 195 & 196/Viz/2021) Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Separate Orders Dated 17/03/2021 For The Ays 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together

220(2) of the Act. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that for the AYs 2013-14, 2014- 15 & 2015-16, the assessee has filed TDS Quarterly returns in Form No.24Q beyond due date specified under the Act. Subsequently, the Ld. AO processed

SUPERINTENDENT OF JAILS CENTRAL PRISION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals (I

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.194, 195 & 196/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Ays: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Superintendent Of Jails, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Prison, Tds Ward-1, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaags 7227 N (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 11/05/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: The Captioned Appeals (I.T.A. No.194, 195 & 196/Viz/2021) Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Separate Orders Dated 17/03/2021 For The Ays 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together

220(2) of the Act. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that for the AYs 2013-14, 2014- 15 & 2015-16, the assessee has filed TDS Quarterly returns in Form No.24Q beyond due date specified under the Act. Subsequently, the Ld. AO processed

SUPERINTENDENT OF JAILS CENTRAL PRISION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals (I

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.194, 195 & 196/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Ays: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Superintendent Of Jails, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Prison, Tds Ward-1, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaags 7227 N (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 11/05/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: The Captioned Appeals (I.T.A. No.194, 195 & 196/Viz/2021) Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Separate Orders Dated 17/03/2021 For The Ays 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together

220(2) of the Act. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that for the AYs 2013-14, 2014- 15 & 2015-16, the assessee has filed TDS Quarterly returns in Form No.24Q beyond due date specified under the Act. Subsequently, the Ld. AO processed

SADHIKA GANNI,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, RAJAHMUNDRY

Bench: Us:

condone the delay involved in the filing of the present appeal. 7. Succinctly stated, the assessee had during the year under consideration made cash deposits of Rs.1 crore in her bank account with HDFC Bank Account No.50100077065070, Branch: Rajamahendravaram on 12.11.2016, which thereafter was transferred to another account held by one Sri Bhaskara Rao on 14.11.2016. 8. On a perusal

SUPERINTENDENT OF JAILS CENTRAL PRISION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.197, 198 & 199/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Ays: 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Superintendent Of Jails, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Prison, Tds Ward-1, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaags 7227 N (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 11/05/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: The Captioned Appeals (I.T.A. No. 197, 198 & 199/Viz/2021) Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Separate Orders Dated 17/03/2021 For The Ays 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together & 2 Disposed Off In This Consolidated Order. There Is A Delay Of 157 Days In Filing The Instant Appeals Before The Tribunal. In This Regard, The Ld. Ar Submitted That As Per The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In Smw(A) No.3 Of 2020, The Period Of Limitation For Filing The Appeals Under General Laws & All Special Laws Falling Between 15/3/2020 & 28/02/2022 Shall Be Excluded For Calculating The Delay. Considering The Same, We Hereby Condone The Delay Of 157 Days In Filing The Present Appeals Before The Tribunal & Proceed To Adjudicate The Cases On Merits.

220(2) of the Act. 3 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that for the AY 2016-17, 2018- 19 & 2019-20, the assessee has filed TDS Quarterly returns in Form No.24Q beyond due date specified under the Act. Subsequently, the Ld. AO assessed

SUPERINTENDENT OF JAILS CENTRAL PRISION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.197, 198 & 199/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Ays: 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Superintendent Of Jails, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Prison, Tds Ward-1, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaags 7227 N (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 11/05/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: The Captioned Appeals (I.T.A. No. 197, 198 & 199/Viz/2021) Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Separate Orders Dated 17/03/2021 For The Ays 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together & 2 Disposed Off In This Consolidated Order. There Is A Delay Of 157 Days In Filing The Instant Appeals Before The Tribunal. In This Regard, The Ld. Ar Submitted That As Per The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In Smw(A) No.3 Of 2020, The Period Of Limitation For Filing The Appeals Under General Laws & All Special Laws Falling Between 15/3/2020 & 28/02/2022 Shall Be Excluded For Calculating The Delay. Considering The Same, We Hereby Condone The Delay Of 157 Days In Filing The Present Appeals Before The Tribunal & Proceed To Adjudicate The Cases On Merits.

220(2) of the Act. 3 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that for the AY 2016-17, 2018- 19 & 2019-20, the assessee has filed TDS Quarterly returns in Form No.24Q beyond due date specified under the Act. Subsequently, the Ld. AO assessed

SUPERINTENDENT OF JAILS CENTRAL PRISION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.197, 198 & 199/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Ays: 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Superintendent Of Jails, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Prison, Tds Ward-1, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaags 7227 N (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 11/05/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: The Captioned Appeals (I.T.A. No. 197, 198 & 199/Viz/2021) Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Separate Orders Dated 17/03/2021 For The Ays 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2019-20. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together & 2 Disposed Off In This Consolidated Order. There Is A Delay Of 157 Days In Filing The Instant Appeals Before The Tribunal. In This Regard, The Ld. Ar Submitted That As Per The Decision Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In Smw(A) No.3 Of 2020, The Period Of Limitation For Filing The Appeals Under General Laws & All Special Laws Falling Between 15/3/2020 & 28/02/2022 Shall Be Excluded For Calculating The Delay. Considering The Same, We Hereby Condone The Delay Of 157 Days In Filing The Present Appeals Before The Tribunal & Proceed To Adjudicate The Cases On Merits.

220(2) of the Act. 3 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that for the AY 2016-17, 2018- 19 & 2019-20, the assessee has filed TDS Quarterly returns in Form No.24Q beyond due date specified under the Act. Subsequently, the Ld. AO assessed

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, GUTNUR vs. ARUNACHALAM MANICKVEL,, GUTNUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue for the A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.202/Viz/2020 To 207/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 To 2016-17) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Arunachalam Manickavel Income Tax Prop : M/S Bharathi Soap Works Central Circle-1 11/25, Amaravathi Road Guntur Gorantla, Guntur [Pan :Acfpa3107K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar. सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the revenue. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds which are common for all the assessment years. 1. The order of the Ld.CIT(A) is erroneous both on the facts and in law. 2. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) ought to have appreciated the probative value of voluntary admission u/s.132

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , GUNTUR vs. ARUNACHALAM MANICKVEL, , GUTNUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue for the A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.202/Viz/2020 To 207/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 To 2016-17) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Arunachalam Manickavel Income Tax Prop : M/S Bharathi Soap Works Central Circle-1 11/25, Amaravathi Road Guntur Gorantla, Guntur [Pan :Acfpa3107K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar. सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the revenue. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds which are common for all the assessment years. 1. The order of the Ld.CIT(A) is erroneous both on the facts and in law. 2. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) ought to have appreciated the probative value of voluntary admission u/s.132

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, GUTNUR vs. ARUNACHALAM MANICKVEL,, GUTNUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue for the A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.202/Viz/2020 To 207/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 To 2016-17) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Arunachalam Manickavel Income Tax Prop : M/S Bharathi Soap Works Central Circle-1 11/25, Amaravathi Road Guntur Gorantla, Guntur [Pan :Acfpa3107K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar. सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the revenue. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds which are common for all the assessment years. 1. The order of the Ld.CIT(A) is erroneous both on the facts and in law. 2. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) ought to have appreciated the probative value of voluntary admission u/s.132

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, GUNTUR vs. ARUNACHALAM MANICKVEL,, GUTNUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue for the A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.202/Viz/2020 To 207/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 To 2016-17) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Arunachalam Manickavel Income Tax Prop : M/S Bharathi Soap Works Central Circle-1 11/25, Amaravathi Road Guntur Gorantla, Guntur [Pan :Acfpa3107K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar. सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the revenue. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds which are common for all the assessment years. 1. The order of the Ld.CIT(A) is erroneous both on the facts and in law. 2. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) ought to have appreciated the probative value of voluntary admission u/s.132

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, GUTNUR vs. ARUNACHALAM MANICKVEL,, GUTNUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue for the A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.202/Viz/2020 To 207/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 To 2016-17) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Arunachalam Manickavel Income Tax Prop : M/S Bharathi Soap Works Central Circle-1 11/25, Amaravathi Road Guntur Gorantla, Guntur [Pan :Acfpa3107K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar. सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the revenue. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds which are common for all the assessment years. 1. The order of the Ld.CIT(A) is erroneous both on the facts and in law. 2. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) ought to have appreciated the probative value of voluntary admission u/s.132

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, GUTNUR vs. ARUNACHALAM MANICKVEL,, GUTNUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue for the A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.202/Viz/2020 To 207/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2011-12 To 2016-17) Dy.Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Arunachalam Manickavel Income Tax Prop : M/S Bharathi Soap Works Central Circle-1 11/25, Amaravathi Road Guntur Gorantla, Guntur [Pan :Acfpa3107K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar. सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench :

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the revenue. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds which are common for all the assessment years. 1. The order of the Ld.CIT(A) is erroneous both on the facts and in law. 2. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) ought to have appreciated the probative value of voluntary admission u/s.132

RIMMALPUDI BHASKARA PATTABHI RAMANA CHOUDARY,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.46 To 67/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramana Choudary, Tds, Ward-1, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Afcpr 2275 M (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 : 31/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority and confirmed the action of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. 8. Considering the facts of the present case, I am of the considered view since the enabling provision for computation of fee while processing the statements was inserted in section 200A only w.e.f 1/6/2015

RIMMALPUDI BHASKARA PATTABHI RAMANA CHOUDARY,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.46 To 67/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramana Choudary, Tds, Ward-1, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Afcpr 2275 M (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 : 31/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority and confirmed the action of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. 8. Considering the facts of the present case, I am of the considered view since the enabling provision for computation of fee while processing the statements was inserted in section 200A only w.e.f 1/6/2015